Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Sunak tried to stop the public seeing this report. Rishi Sunak ordered to publish secret analysis showing Universal Credit cut impact - Mirror Online WWW.MIRROR.CO.UK As Chancellor, Rishi Sunak ignored pleas from campaigners including footballer Marcus Rashford by scrapping the £20-per-week Universal Credit...  
    • A full-scale strike at the firm could have an impact on the global supply chains of electronics.View the full article
    • He was one of four former top executives from Sam Bankman-Fried's firms to plead guilty to charges.View the full article
    • The private submersible industry was shaken after the implosion of the OceanGate Titan sub last year.View the full article
    • further polished WS using above suggestions and also included couple of more modifications highlighted in orange are those ok to include?   Background   1.1  The Defendant received the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) on the 06th of January 2020 following the vehicle being parked at Arla Old Dairy, South Ruislip on the 05th of December 2019.   Unfair PCN   2.1  On 19th December 2023 the Defendant sent the Claimant's solicitors a CPR request.  As shown in Exhibit 1 (pages 7-13) sent by the solicitors the signage displayed in their evidence clearly shows a £60.00 parking charge notice (which will be reduced to £30 if paid within 14 days of issue).  2.2  Yet the PCN sent by the Claimant is for a £100.00 parking charge notice (reduced to £60 if paid within 30 days of issue).   2.3        The Claimant relies on signage to create a contract.  It is unlawful for the Claimant to write that the charge is £60 on their signs and then send demands for £100.    2.4        The unlawful £100 charge is also the basis for the Claimant's Particulars of Claim.  No Locus Standi  3.1  I do not believe a contract with the landowner, that is provided following the defendant’s CPR request, gives MET Parking Services a right to bring claims in their own name. Definition of “Relevant contract” from the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4,  2 [1] means a contract Including a contract arising only when the vehicle was parked on the relevant land between the driver and a person who is-   (a) the owner or occupier of the land; or   (b) Authorised, under or by virtue of arrangements made by the owner or occupier of the land, to enter into a contract with the driver requiring the payment of parking charges in respect of the parking of the vehicle on the land. According to https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/section/44   For a contract to be valid, it requires a director from each company to sign and then two independent witnesses must confirm those signatures.   3.2  The Defendant requested to see such a contract in the CPR request.  The fact that no contract has been produced with the witness signatures present means the contract has not been validly executed. Therefore, there can be no contract established between MET Parking Services and the motorist. Even if “Parking in Electric Bay” could form a contract (which it cannot), it is immaterial. There is no valid contract.  Illegal Conduct – No Contract Formed   4.1 At the time of writing, the Claimant has failed to provide the following, in response to the CPR request from myself.   4.2        The legal contract between the Claimant and the landowner (which in this case is Standard Life Investments UK) to provide evidence that there is an agreement in place with landowner with the necessary authority to issue parking charge notices and to pursue payment by means of litigation.   4.3 Proof of planning permission granted for signage etc under the Town and country Planning Act 1990. Lack of planning permission is a criminal offence under this Act and no contract can be formed where criminality is involved.   4.4        I also do not believe the claimant possesses these documents.   No Keeper Liability   5.1        The defendant was not the driver at the time and date mentioned in the PCN and the claimant has not established keeper liability under schedule 4 of the PoFA 2012. In this matter, the defendant puts it to the claimant to produce strict proof as to who was driving at the time.   5.2 The claimant in their Notice To Keeper also failed to comply with PoFA 2012 Schedule 4 section 9[2][f] while mentioning “the right to recover from the keeper so much of that parking charge as remains unpaid” where they did not include statement “(if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met)”.     5.3         The claimant did not mention parking period, times on the photographs are separate from the PCN and in any case are that arrival and departure times not the parking period since their times include driving to and from the parking space as a minimum and can include extra time to allow pedestrians and other vehicles to pass in front.    Protection of Freedoms Act 2012   The notice must -   (a) specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates;  22. In the persuasive judgement K4GF167G - Premier Park Ltd v Mr Mathur - Horsham County Court – 5 January 2024 it was on this very point that the judge dismissed this claim.  5.4  A the PCN does not comply with the Act the Defendant as keeper is not liable.  No Breach of Contract   6.1       No breach of contract occurred because the PCN and contract provided as part of the defendant’s CPR request shows different post code, PCN shows HA4 0EY while contract shows HA4 0FY. According to PCN defendant parked on HA4 0EY which does not appear to be subject to the postcode covered by the contract.  6.2         The entrance sign does not mention anything about there being other terms inside the car park so does not offer a contract which makes it only an offer to treat,  Interest  7.1  It is unreasonable for the Claimant to delay litigation for  Double Recovery   7.2  The claim is littered with made-up charges.  7.3  As noted above, the Claimant's signs state a £60 charge yet their PCN is for £100.  7.4  As well as the £100 parking charge, the Claimant seeks recovery of an additional £70.  This is simply a poor attempt to circumvent the legal costs cap at small claims.  7.5 Since 2019, many County Courts have considered claims in excess of £100 to be an abuse of process leading to them being struck out ab initio. An example, in the Caernarfon Court in VCS v Davies, case No. FTQZ4W28 on 4th September 2019, District Judge Jones-Evans stated “Upon it being recorded that District Judge Jones- Evans has over a very significant period of time warned advocates (...) in many cases of this nature before this court that their claim for £60 is unenforceable in law and is an abuse of process and is nothing more than a poor attempt to go behind the decision of the Supreme Court v Beavis which inter alia decided that a figure of £160 as a global sum claimed in this case would be a penalty and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss and therefore unenforceable in law and if the practice continued, he would treat all cases as a claim for £160 and therefore a penalty and unenforceable in law it is hereby declared (…) the claim is struck out and declared to be wholly without merit and an abuse of process.”  7.6 In Claim Nos. F0DP806M and F0DP201T, District Judge Taylor echoed earlier General Judgment or Orders of District Judge Grand, stating ''It is ordered that the claim is struck out as an abuse of process. The claim contains a substantial charge additional to the parking charge which it is alleged the Defendant contracted to pay. This additional charge is not recoverabl15e under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4 nor with reference to the judgment in Parking Eye v Beavis. It is an abuse of process from the Claimant to issue a knowingly inflated claim for an additional sum which it is not entitled to recover. This order has been made by the court of its own initiative without a hearing pursuant to CPR Rule 3.3(4)) of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998...''  7.7 In the persuasive case of G4QZ465V - Excel Parking Services Ltd v Wilkinson – Bradford County Court -2 July 2020 (Exhibit 4) the judge had decided that Excel had won. However, due to Excel adding on the £60 the Judge dismissed the case.  7.8        The addition of costs not previously specified on signage are also in breach of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, Schedule 2, specifically paras 6, 10 and 14.   7.9        It is the Defendant’s position that the Claimant in this case has knowingly submitted inflated costs and thus the entire claim should be similarly struck out in accordance with Civil Procedure Rule 3.3(4).   In Conclusion   8.1        I invite the court to dismiss the claim.  Statement of Truth  I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.   
  • 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

Bank Charges Affecting Benefits?


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5761 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

*whispers so no goverment bods hear this*

Does anyone know if reclaiming bank charges can have an affect on your benefits? Im sure it wouldnt affect working/child tax credits, as this is money earned by you already, which was unlawfully taken. However I remember claiming HB and CTB a few years back, and you are required to provide bank statements, and declare all income, wherever the source. Income support/JSA is another one... Could this be a problem? Has anyone had any problems when claiming these beneifts, and the bank charge refund showing up on their statements??

Im very curious to know....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very glad you are asking this question since I'm on H/B. Gonna have to do some reading because i intend to save the money i win in a high interest saving account for a short period and need to know what the savings freshold is before it affects your benefit. I'm not sure but i could argue that this is not income as such because the charges in most cases were taken from my benefit therefor it isn't an extra income i'm only getting back whats been taken from me. In a way, its almost like saying we can't give u benefit because you have taken out a loan even though you will have to pay this money!

 

Will try to find a site that gives simple answers to these questions unless someone else answers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know - it seems simple to me, its money you have already had, and have claimed it back, just like getting a refund from a shop ! But I remember avidly what these people were like! Not the brightest buttons in the box... having to tell people how to do there job is just unbelieveable!

 

I think the savings thing was around £8000 max, but i seem to remember reading something to say it was £3000 when it started to affect the claim. However if your claim was more than this, I would argue that this money is a refund, its not savings. You could possibly get it in an account for your child, or seperate it between family memebers etc! I would get my mum to hold it in an account for me, if i was in that situation!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Income from such claims should not be taken into account as income or savings, since it is money that you have lost that you are legally due. Of course, you would need to speak to someone who knows about this to confirm this.

HSBCLloyds TSBcontractual interestNew Tax Creditscoming for you?NTL/Virgin Media

 

Never give in ... Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy. Churchill, 1941

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. having though some more, i thinks I'd have a prob if i decided to save it because at that point, i would start earning interest on the account and therefore it could be seen as income from that point onwards.

 

I can just see the battle ahead as I've found them to be the most incompetent people ever. I'm still fighting an overpayment from 2003 which they have been deducting from my H/B and as it turns out, they may have actually underpaid me. Thanks to this site I've now learnt to questions all sorts of financial authorities.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...

Child Tax credits/Child Benefit are not means tested - therefore any refund made would not affect these benefits.

 

Housing Benefit and Council Tax benefits ARE means tested.

The threshold for impact is any amount is £6000.

Any savings (or accumulation of savings amounts) exceeding this threshold - means a pro-rata reduction in how the benefit amounts are calculated.

£1 must be added to your available weekly income for each additional £250 or part thereof in excess of £6000.

If you have over £16000 in savings, unless in certain exceptional circumstances, you will not be entitled to any assistance.

 

Hope this helps.

Perseus

If my advice has helped, please click on my scales. Thank you!

MBNA - CRA file to be cleared then finished!

__________________________________________

Abbey Personal - Final LBA 28/5/7 - then Court

__________________________________________

Capital One - Final LBA 28/5/7 - then Court

__________________________________________

GMAC - Sent DCA SAR 9th March 07 - confirmed not legally assigned.

Waiting for GMAC to provide breakdown of charges and CCA under s79

__________________________________________

Alliance & Leicester - Final LBA 28/5/7 - then Court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bank refunds are NOT income. It is money that you have already declared (i.e. received £100 benefit, bank took £35 or earned £100 income after tax and bank took £35).

 

Any interest you receive back IS counted as income so needs to be declared (i.e. £100 charges + £20 interest. Income is £20).

 

Any compensation you receive as a result of a claim is also NOT income (i.e. you might receive £500 because they defaulted you by mistake). If you claim any benefit just let them know it is this and not income. They cannot do anything because the Inland Revenue have a special code for compensation payments so it is not counted as income.

 

Remember, it is the Inland Revenue who decide what is income and what is not, not any benefit payers. They have to accept the government rules as applied through the IR. If the IR don't call it income, nobody else can.

 

I had the same problem with council tax a few years ago and they asked where i got a large sum of money from (endowment compensation). I showed them the letter from the endowment company which stated they have told the Inland Revenue about this payment and i don't need to declare it as income. Then they asked what i did with it. I told them its not your place to ask. Bank charges fall into the same category.

 

Hope this helps.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that tifo - didn't know that.

Makes my OH's case very interesting, as potential for a £7k claim, we were panicing about the £6k threshold for savings.

 

Thank you!

If my advice has helped, please click on my scales. Thank you!

MBNA - CRA file to be cleared then finished!

__________________________________________

Abbey Personal - Final LBA 28/5/7 - then Court

__________________________________________

Capital One - Final LBA 28/5/7 - then Court

__________________________________________

GMAC - Sent DCA SAR 9th March 07 - confirmed not legally assigned.

Waiting for GMAC to provide breakdown of charges and CCA under s79

__________________________________________

Alliance & Leicester - Final LBA 28/5/7 - then Court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Savings, of course, is also income which you have declared but have not spent. In a way, the benefit people could twist this around and say refunds are savings. They'll try anything to get themselves to pay you less.

 

I don't know how the bank refund affects savings so please check up or maybe someone may come along and offer something. I personally haven't come across this problem as my claims are under £1k each.

 

I suppose if you receive the money then move it somewhere else then you haven't saved it. Maybe you have creditors or family you have to pay back etc.

 

But what i stated in my last post is also true.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that Pkea

 

Looks like at lot of people will be making donations to charities/family members on receipt of large settlements then :rolleyes:

 

P

If my advice has helped, please click on my scales. Thank you!

MBNA - CRA file to be cleared then finished!

__________________________________________

Abbey Personal - Final LBA 28/5/7 - then Court

__________________________________________

Capital One - Final LBA 28/5/7 - then Court

__________________________________________

GMAC - Sent DCA SAR 9th March 07 - confirmed not legally assigned.

Waiting for GMAC to provide breakdown of charges and CCA under s79

__________________________________________

Alliance & Leicester - Final LBA 28/5/7 - then Court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

Hi I am on Income support and have recently been affect by bank charges of £28 for me going over my limit of like £2.00 , these charges are coming of my benefit , I also have an overdraft would that affect me in getting my charges back.

 

Please help dont know where to start :confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

It kinda depends on the bank. Which bank are you with?

 

If its just one charge then call the bank customer services and tell them that you are on benefits and that you would like the charge refunded. If they refuse (which they usually will) say that you want to make an official complaint. They will usually then agree to refund the charge rather than log a complaint.

 

Let us know how you get on -

A £35 pound bank charge is not a charge for a service. Its theft.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 10 months later...

i am on

carers allwance, income support and DLA. on my bank statemens it has my NI with dwp at the end.

 

and back in round oct 06, by bank hsbc took most of it.

 

was the bank Legally allowed to do that?

 

after this happend my bank give me a overdraft of £500, now that has gone up to 1K

 

after reading about all the posts about benfits beeing taken can the banks take your benfit money or not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i am on

 

carers allwance, income support and DLA. on my bank statemens it has my NI with dwp at the end.

 

and back in round oct 06, by bank hsbc took most of it.

 

was the bank Legally allowed to do that?Yes, unfortunately they can.

 

after this happend my bank give me a overdraft of £500, now that has gone up to 1K

 

after reading about all the posts about benfits beeing taken can the banks take your benfit money or not.

Yes they can and Steven064 has a thread on that topic

.

FSA Waiver on Bank Charges:http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Doing/Regulated/Notify/Waiver/pdf/dir_quart_0709.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...