Jump to content
  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Now I wonder, if the land is owned by the council and they can  use the RTA to enforce their rules why do they emply a bunch of banditd to manage the place? It woudl be easy to argue that the "fine" should be that set by local govt  and thus be about £30, not 390. this means Highview's demands are thus an unlawful penalty as they are higher than the prescribed tariff so they would lose a court claim on that basis regardless of the validity fo their contract with the LL and the motorist.   that means a complaint could be put to the local govt ombudsman and the council would have to behave and probably have to pay up compensation to the aggrieved motorist for the unlawfulness and distress so enfield would be around £130 a ticket down for every one challenged
    • If no Planning Permission, signs etc are illegal and no contract can exist, as it would be founded in a criminal action, signs without correct permissions to be erected.  PE have been caught out by this many times.  they are owned by Capita, same bunch that run TV Licensing for BBC
    • Yes, fill out the bit forwarded to yu by the car hire co adn take them on if you wish. you will need to be returning to Margate to get piccies of the place but in the meanwhile read up on private parking and also ahve a look at thaney councils planning portal and see if PE have permission to put their signs and cameras up in the first place
    • you need to edit that response as it was sent to a bunch of lawyers acting as debt collectors. so drop the bit about rentathreats. I would add the salutation Dear Ashley, it is no use trying to hide, we all know it is you writing this garbage.....     reason for thi is that a person well known in parking world isnt listed as having a controlling interest in the company contrary to Company Law
    • as they target commercial vehicles it isnt usually necessary to get the keeper details, they just demand money from the company that has their logo plastered on the side of the lorry. There is also different law surrounding their demands as the POFA doesnt apply and it isnt a consumer contract. You will unfortunately need to do a lot of reading up about these people as they ahve had mixed success in the courts so a bit of a lottery as to what bits of previous cases to use as being relevant.   However, the signage is on your side as ity mentions removal of vehicles, which means that unless the byelaws specifically allow it (and then the cost of removal doesnt necessarily ahve to be borne by the vehicle owner) then it is  unlawful and possibly illegal so that makes the whole contract void as it is a criminal compact   Proserve have a very complicated arrangement with the landowner and that means they have to pay the landowner for every trespass and then claim the money back form the vehicle driver/owner. in practicve they dont pay a peny in advance (can you imagine how long they would be inbusiness if they ahd to fork out hundreds of thousands a week with little prospect of recovering those advances?)   they also stop vehicles entering the docks if the company that owns it refuses to pay or has beaten them in court before despite not having any powers to do so. A vindictive, dishonest outfit.
  • Our picks

    • Curry’s cancelled my order but took the money anyway. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/423055-curry%E2%80%99s-cancelled-my-order-but-took-the-money-anyway/
      • 11 replies
    • Father passed away - Ardent Credit Services (Vodafone) now claiming he owes money. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/423040-father-passed-away-ardent-credit-services-vodafone-now-claiming-he-owes-money/
      • 9 replies
    • Currys Refuse Refund F/Freezer 5day old. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422656-currys-refuse-refund-ffreezer-5day-old/
      • 6 replies
    • Hi,  
      I was in Sainsbury’s today and did scan and shop.
      I arrived in after a busy day at work and immediately got distracted by the clothes.
       
      I put a few things in my trolley and then did a shop.
      I paid and was about to get into my car when the security guard stopped me and asked me to come back in.
       
      I did and they took me upstairs.
      I was mortified and said I forgot to scan the clothes and a conditioner, 5 items.
      I know its unacceptable but I was distracted and Initially hadn’t really planned to use scan and shop.
       
      No excuse.
      I offered to pay for the goods but the manager said it was too late.
      He looked at the CCTV and because I didn’t try to scan the items he was phoning the police.
       
      The cost of the items was about £40.
      I was crying at this point and told them I was a nurse, just coming from work and I could get struck off.
       
      They rang the police anyway and they came and issued me with a community resolution notice, which goes off my record in a year.
      I feel terrible. I have to declare this to my employer and NMC.
       
      They kept me in a room on my own with 4 staff and have banned me from all stores.
      The police said if I didn’t do the community order I would go to court and they would refer me to the PPS.
       
      I’m so stressed,
      can u appeal this or should I just accept it?
       
      Thanks for reading 
      • 16 replies
sarahj22

Going to tribunal after court for benefit fraud

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3681 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hiya I have asked a few questions for my friend before who has been prosecuted for benefit fraud.

The DWP had originally made a decision that she had been lining with a partner from July 05 to July 09. The council took her to court where even the defence said they didn't have enough evidence to get a conviction for the 4 year so they came to an agreement of 7 months and she pleaded guilty to this and received her punishment.

 

When the origonal decision came through she appealed it straight away but never heard a thing. Today she has received papers for a tribunal hearing saying they re looked at the case and still decided she was overpaid for the 4 years. This second decision was made before she went to court but they never sent her any letters saying this even tho there is a copy of them with the papers she got today.

 

So my question is as the defence admitted they didn't have enough evidence to prove she was living with a partner during the dates the DWP decided dose she have a good case to get the desertion changed to the same dates that her conviction in court was based on.

I'm a little miffed as to how the DWP think they have got a strong enough case to say she was guilty and has been overpaid when the defense quite clearly doesn't agree otherwise they would have taken it to crown court and pushed for the full amount.

 

Thanks for any advise.

Edited by sarahj22

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The court decision is based on what is beyond reasonable doubt & the benefit decision is based on probability.

 

She has been prosecuted for the period that can be proved beyond doubt, however this doesn't change the benefit decision & the full overpayment period will stand pending the appeal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh I see, Thanks for that information. It's gets me so mad tho that they can lump someone with a huge debt based purely on probability.

I know she was not living with a partner for the time they are saying tho so I suppose that's why it angers me so much

I just wounder how many other people they do this to and get it totally wrong.

 

Have you any idea how these tribunal things work. Will she be able to call whiteness and provide documents and letters proving her side.

 

Are they also based on probability or proper facts ??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A tribunal will apply the law to the facts and the decision is made upon the balance of probability of which of those facts are correct.

 

That letter about the tribunal hearing - is it from DWP advising they have made a decision and it is going to tribunal or is the letter from the Tribunal Service?

 

I ask because, if the first tier tribunal have already made a determination, she can only appeal against that decision to the upper tier tribunal on a point of law.


My advice is based on my opinion, my experience and my education. I do not profess to be an expert in any given field. If requested, I will provide a link where possible to relevant legislation or guidance, so that advice provided can be confirmed and I do encourage others to follow those links for their own peace of mind. Sometimes my advice is not what people necesserily want to hear, but I will advise on facts as I know them - although it may not be what a person wants to hear it helps to know where you stand. Advice on the internet should never be a substitute for advice from your own legal professional with full knowledge of your individual case.

 

 

Please do not seek, offer or produce advice on a consumer issue via private message; it is against

forum rules to advise via private message, therefore pm's requesting private advice will not receive a response.

(exceptions for prior authorisation)

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hiya the letter is from DWP. It says it's a copy of the appeal papers and a copy has been sent to the tribunals service who will get in touch with her to explain what happens next.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's fine.

 

What will happen next is she will be sent forms from the Tribunals Service about the appeal. They will ask if she wants an oral hearing or a paper hearing. It will also ask her to provide any further evidence she has in support of her appeal to them - she should send photocopies of any documents which support her appeal in good time.

 

If she chooses a paper appeal, all of the papers she has received from DWP in addition to any evidence she sends to the tribunal will be considered and a decision made on the basis of all of the facts on the balance of probabilities whether he was living there for the 4 years or for less.

 

If she chooses an oral appeal, they will still look at all of the paper evidence but there is also the opportunity for her and her representative (if she has one) to attend and she can answer any questions the tribunal may have to clarify the facts at hand. The tribunal do play an inquisitive role and she will be asked a lot of questions but it's not as formal as a court hearing. Once they are finished gathering all the information they require they will ask all parties to leave the room. Again, a decision would be made on the basis of all of the facts on the balance of probabilities (whether it was more likely than not) that he was living there for the period in question. They will call all parties back in and announce their decision - in most cases. In some cases, you don't get the decision on the day and have to await a written notice of the decision. Either way the decision will always be confirmed in writing.

 

It's quite common for appeals to be suspended pending the outcome of criminal proceedings for a related case.

 

As Jabba has explained, the standard of proof in criminal law is beyond all reasonable doubt meaning that if there is any doubt whatsoever, the case cannot be proven. In civil law, the standard of proof is much lower, on the balance of probabilities meaning they just need to show it is more likely than not.


My advice is based on my opinion, my experience and my education. I do not profess to be an expert in any given field. If requested, I will provide a link where possible to relevant legislation or guidance, so that advice provided can be confirmed and I do encourage others to follow those links for their own peace of mind. Sometimes my advice is not what people necesserily want to hear, but I will advise on facts as I know them - although it may not be what a person wants to hear it helps to know where you stand. Advice on the internet should never be a substitute for advice from your own legal professional with full knowledge of your individual case.

 

 

Please do not seek, offer or produce advice on a consumer issue via private message; it is against

forum rules to advise via private message, therefore pm's requesting private advice will not receive a response.

(exceptions for prior authorisation)

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that info I will pass it on.

 

As she has already been to court she will not be taken to court again will she.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not for this offence, no. Even if they decide on the balance of probabilities that she was overpaid for the full 4 years. The civil case is completely seperate to the criminal case and one will not affect the other.


My advice is based on my opinion, my experience and my education. I do not profess to be an expert in any given field. If requested, I will provide a link where possible to relevant legislation or guidance, so that advice provided can be confirmed and I do encourage others to follow those links for their own peace of mind. Sometimes my advice is not what people necesserily want to hear, but I will advise on facts as I know them - although it may not be what a person wants to hear it helps to know where you stand. Advice on the internet should never be a substitute for advice from your own legal professional with full knowledge of your individual case.

 

 

Please do not seek, offer or produce advice on a consumer issue via private message; it is against

forum rules to advise via private message, therefore pm's requesting private advice will not receive a response.

(exceptions for prior authorisation)

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you very much for your help you have been a great help :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...