Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi everyone, Apologies for bringing up the same topic regarding these individuals. I wish I had found this forum earlier, as I've seen very similar cases. However, I need your help in figuring out what to do next because we've involved our partners/resellers. I work as an IT Manager in a company outside of the UK. We acquired a license from a certified reseller (along with a support agreement) and also obtained training sessions from them. The issue arose when we needed to register two people for the training sessions, so we used an external laptop for the second user to keep up with the sessions for only a month. During this period, the laptop was solely used for the training sessions. After two weeks, my boss forwarded an email to me from Ms Vinces, stating that we are using illicit software from SolidWorks. Since this has never happened to me or anyone we know, I went into panic mode and had a meeting with her. During the meeting, we explained that we were using an external laptop solely for the training sessions and that the laptop had not been used within the company since her email. She informed us that for such cases, there are demos and special licenses (though our reseller did not mention these types of licenses when we made our initial purchase). She then mentioned that we had utilized products worth approximately €25k and presented us with two options: either pay the agreed value or acquire SolidWorks products. We expressed that the cost was too high, and our business couldn't support such expenses. I assured her that we would discuss the matter with the company board and get back to her. After the meeting, we contacted the company reseller from whom we purchased the license, explained the situation, and mentioned the use of an external laptop. They said they would speak to Maria and help mediate the situation. We hoped to significantly reduce the cost, perhaps to that of a 1-year professional license. Unfortunately, we were mistaken. The reseller mediated a value €2k less than what Maria had suggested (essentially, we would need to acquire two professional lifetime licenses and two years of support for a total of €23k). This amount is still beyond our means, but they insisted that the price was non-negotiable and wouldn't be reduced any further. The entire situation feels odd because she never provided us with addresses or other evidence (which I should have requested), and she's pressuring us to resolve the matter by the end of the month, with payment to be made through the reseller. This makes me feel as though the reseller is taking advantage of the situation to profit from it. Currently, we're trying to buy some time. We plan to meet with the reseller next week but are uncertain about how to proceed with them or whether we should respond to the mediator.
    • Thanks London  if I’ve read correctly the questionaire wants me to post his actual name on a public forum… is that correct.  I’ve only had a quick read so far
    • Plenty of success stories, also bear in mind not everyone updates the forum.  Overdale's want you to roll over and pay, without using your enshrined legal right to defend. make you wet yourself in fear that a solicitor will Take you to court, so you will pay up without question. Most people do just that,  but you are lucky that you have found this place and can help you put together a good defence. You should get reading on some other Capital One and Overdale's cases on the forum to get an idea of how it works.  
    • In both versions the three references to "your clients" near the end need to be changed to "you" or "your" as Alliance are not using solicitors, they have sent the LoC themselves. Personally I'd change "Dear ALLIANCE PARKING Litigation Dept" to "Dear Kev".  It would show you'd done your homework, looked up the company, and seen it's a pathetic one-man band rather than having any departments.  The PPCs love to pretend they have some official power and so you should be scared of them - showing you've sussed their sordid games and you're confident about fighting them undermines all this.  In fact that's the whole point of a snotty letter - to show you'd be big trouble for them if they did do court so better to drop you like a hot potato and go and pursue mugs who just give in instead. In the very, very, very, very unlikely case of Kev doing court, it'd be better that he didn't know in advance all the legal arguments you'd be using, so I'd heavily reduce the number of cards being played.
    • Thanx Londoneill get on to it this evening having a read around these forums I can’t seem to find many success stories using your methods. So how successful are these methods or am I just buying time for him  and a ccj will be inevitable in the end. Thanks another question is, will he have to appear at court..? I am not sure he has got it in him
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 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
      • 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

Date of claim JSA


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5047 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

Afternoon folks,

 

can any one advice me on whether your date of claim for JSA is from the first point of contact ie your telephone call to the contact centre + 3 waiting days?

 

if possible would anyone be able to link me the relevant regulations?

 

a little background....

 

My brother has made a claim for JSA not too sure whether © or (IB), the jobcentre for his postcode is actually futher away that the one he lives closest to but this one is not in his postal district (manchester/salford boundary). His appointment should have been for Monday. He received a call this morning from the jobcentre where the interview was to be held asking if he would consider using the jobcentre nearer to him but with a rescheduled appointment for Thurday ie today. He stated that he would just like to get the claim up and running so would prefer to keep the original appointment. He turned up on Monday to find the no trace of his appointment just the Thurday one showing on system. He had the letter they had sent him with Monday appointments details but to no avail they just point blank refused to see him or to honour this appointment. There were no notes put into LMS about the reschduled appointment either.

 

On attending his appointment this morning at the other jobcentre they told him that his claim would run from today not from first contact and they would not backdate it as they felt there wasn't reason to :mad:!! They even hinted at the fact that they felt he had rescheduled this appointment to be nearer his home :mad: - this is in spite of the fact that he has made numerous claims over the years when he has been out of work all from the original jobcentre.

 

any advice would be appreciated

 

thanks

 

TB ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The TAM ( treat as made ) date is the day he contacted the call centre. His original appointment will be on LMS even if it has been cancelled, there 'should' be a note in converstations as well. The decision on the backdated claim is made at the Benefits Centre, not the Jobcentre. If he still has the letter with the original date, ask for it to be photocopied and sent to the Benefits Centre with his claim. I really don't see why it should be a problem!

As for where he signs, he can choose to sign at any Jobcentre he wants, again it shouldn't be a problem, it just needs the claim transferring.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The relevant legislation is the Claims and Payments regulations 1987, as amended. (there are so many amendments to these regulations!).

 

Basically the date of claim for telephone claims is determined in the same way as if the claim was made in writing.

 

Para 02093 DMG Chapter 2 - Claims also states this.

 

In a nutshell, providing that all of the relevant information was provided on the date that he called the contact centre, this will be his date of claim. If there was anything that he wasn't able to provide at that date, he has one month in which to provide it (he would have been advised at the time if this was the case) for that date still to be accepted as his date of claim.

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)

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm.

 

Its rare that anyone is sent an appointment confirmation letter these days as no standard letter exists to do so any more. I would keep the letter however since if he wants to make a case for backdating the claim it will be evidence to show that he had been in contact beforehand.

 

On that subject as far as I know Northern Monk is right, the jobcentre staff do not have the right to tell anyone that they cannot backdate a claim, that's the role of a decision maker who usually works at a Benefit Delivery Centre. Even if the JC staff feel the reasons for backdating are spurious they are not supposed to override the request as that is not within their job role. I would ask for them to provide him with the relevant form (JSA5) so that he can put in the request.

 

Now about the cancelled/rebooked/missing appointment (WFI). If he went through the whole claim with an advisor over the phone the system used to record his answers will also record an initial date of contact (IDOC) which should correspond to the date he started the process. Even if he had to call back at some point this would remain, unless as Erika says he waited more than 30 days in which case he'd have to do another claim. If at any point after he's completed the series of questions someone withdraws the claim it will require them to put an explanatory note as to why, and this pulls through onto the system used to book appointments.

 

With regards to the appointment on Monday if it was booked at any point at all - even if it was withdrawn straight after - a record of it remains on his system. So even if it wasn't outstanding by the time he turned up it wouldn't have taken too much effort for someone at the jobcentre to check if one had ever been booked for that day and time.

 

What they said about taking the claim from the day he arrived doesn't seem right however, and if they insist I'd appeal against the decision. There are things like waiting days but there's no reason in what you've mentioned that these should start now rather than when he did the call.

 

Out of interest do you know when he did the claim and what route (phone, internet etc) he used?

Edited by privatehudson
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...