Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I understand what you mean. But consider that part of the problem, and the frustration of those trying to help, is the way that questions are asked without context and without straight facts. A lot of effort was wasted discussing as a consumer issue before it was mentioned that the property was BTL. I don't think we have your history with this property. Were you the freehold owner prior to this split? Did you buy the leasehold of one half? From a family member? How was that funded (earlier loan?). How long ago was it split? Have either of the leasehold halves changed hands since? I'm wondering if the split and the leashold/freehold arrangements were set up in a way that was OK when everyone was everyone was connected. But a way that makes the leasehold virtually unsaleable to an unrelated party.
    • quite honestly id email shiply CEO with that crime ref number and state you will be taking this to court, for the full sum of your losses, if it is not resolved ASAP. should that be necessary then i WILL be naming Shiply as the defendant. this can be avoided should the information upon whom the courier was and their current new company contact details, as the present is simply LONDON VIRTUAL OFFICES  is a company registered there and there's a bunch of other invisible companies so clearly just a mail address   
    • If it doesn’t sell easily : what they can get at an auction becomes fair market price, which may not realise what you are hoping.
    • Thank you. The receiver issue is a rabbit hole I don't think I'm going to enjoy going down. These people seem so protected. And I don't understand how or why?  Fair market value seems to be ever shifting and contentious.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
        • Like
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

having problems over what classifies as capital


watson66
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5133 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Please help us. My husband has been on long term sick for 3 and 1/2 years. He gets incapacity benefit, and PHI (permanent health insurance). The PHI company have made him an offer of £14,000 in full and final payment, on the condition he terminates his employment with his employer.

 

Currently we get a little help with our rent and council tax. If the payment is classed as capital it wont affect what we get in benefits, in fact we will be better off, as will only have the incapacity benefit coming in as a monthly earning. However, the council are now saying they aren;t sure if they will class this lump sum as capital but may treat it as an earning.

 

Can anyone help?

 

Obviously a lump sum would be amazing we could treat the kids to take them on a once in a life time holiday, and pay off some debts, but if they treat it as an earning it will be gone in a year paying our rent.

 

Also if anyone knows if its tax free that would be great too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello there. I don't know if it's tax-free, but the insurance company should be able to tell you, and obviously that's important for anyone.

 

Have you done the maths to work out the amount your OH would be paid over the rest of the life of the PHI policy multiplied by the number of years it has to run? I mean, if the PHI pays 1000 a year for the next 10-14 years, the offer might be fair. In my experience, insurers tend to offer a lump sum thinking that gullible people will accept and go away, saving the insurance co money.

 

I'm not sure about whether this would alter your benefits or council help, but I think it might. Hopefully, someone will be along to answer that for you.

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello there. I don't know if it's tax-free, but the insurance company should be able to tell you, and obviously that's important for anyone.

 

Have you done the maths to work out the amount your OH would be paid over the rest of the life of the PHI policy multiplied by the number of years it has to run? I mean, if the PHI pays 1000 a year for the next 10-14 years, the offer might be fair. In my experience, insurers tend to offer a lump sum thinking that gullible people will accept and go away, saving the insurance co money.

 

I'm not sure about whether this would alter your benefits or council help, but I think it might. Hopefully, someone will be along to answer that for you.

 

HB

 

Thats a very good point, the thing is we cant guarantee he will always pass their medicals. We dont know how long they will keep paying, i think its ongoing as long as he passed their medicals. My hubby never wants to return to his employment thats the other problem so this way it frees him for the future for when hes hopefully feeling better.

 

To be honest the 14,000 is only just over what they are paying him a year! Do you think if we called their bluff we would get more?

 

Oh and the tax fee thing has to be apparently assessed and decided by HRMC, so we dont know, it looks like it may be but not sure, its the council thing worrying me cos were going to be worse off despite the lump sum.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, off the top of my head, I would say the PHI offer is a rubbish deal. You could try asking them how they've calculated the amount, or ask via your OH's company if it's not his own policy.

 

Some companies seem to make a joke offer in the hopes of getting rid of people off the books. I can't say if they will increase the offer and I take your point about your OH not passing the medicals. Have you had any professional opinions about that?

 

I don't quite understand why they want him to leave the employer, do you know please?

 

HB

  • Haha 1

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well a lot of him leaving in first place was due to stress at work so for him its a benefit not to have to go back there, I guess for them, it just clears their books after 3 and 1/2 years. We feel very lucky that they had the insurance in place to pay him, but do see where your coming from about paying him off. Maybe we should say we want to walk away with 14,000 so if it comes back not tax free, they will have to up the amount, to cover the tax?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...