Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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

What is ADF funding used for?


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4990 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

Hi guys, Im just wondering what is the ADF fnding used for, as i just need to renew a sia badge but can not afford to but my advisor wont access ADF any ideas why? . I have been told by all employment agencies that i can not do a course with them as i do not need employiablty skills and the course as i just need the badge renewing, i have been told by several employers that would consider me for security roles but can not as i do not have a badge, also been told if get offered a job they would, but a security firm can not hire me with out one as they breaking the law.

I have been unemployed now for nearly a year and tried every way to get this badge renewed, but no luck i am new deal. me and my family are savein for the badge but it is not cheap to do at the moment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Also, I've heard that some Jobcentres are saying that there simply is no ADF money available at all. I've been out of the loop for some months now so I don't know, but it wouldn't surprise me, given the noises we're hearing from our new ConDem Overlords.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING. EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

The idea that all politicians lie is music to the ears of the most egregious liars.

Link to post
Share on other sites

after reading th documents i think you could be right that there no funding, as we have asked to access it on 3 occassions, but wont the advisor changes the subject it annoyin but what have they spent it on then???:confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Struggling

 

You might find some help in the following link

 

http://cashalerts.co.uk/2010/04/advisor-discretion-fund/

 

Also bear in mind that the Adviser will look at how many security jobs there are on offer in your area. Print off as many as you can to strengthen your case. Also get as many letters from security companies stating that they would consider employing you if you had the license renewed. If they still refuse you after this then take your evidence to your local MP and complain.

 

Oh, one last thing, if JCP say you have reached stage 4 (unemployed for a year) which means you are now not eligible for the advisor discretion grant. Remind them how many times you have previously requested help to pay for the renewal.

 

Good Luck

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for reply, he been told he would be considered for 3 jobs and had letters' and emails to prove this but they dont care.

here is what was said last time we went.

the advisor " we are sending you on a 4 week course to get your SIA Badge" us, "Ok can we ask why a course when all that needs doing is renew the badge?" the advisor goes and makes a call then comes back and says " when your badge expires you need to resit the course" we then show eveidence of the SIA to prove otherwise.

The advisor books a date with the firm for a interview to get on the course.

We ring the company the adivsor sending us to over deatils and location of them to get there easier, We ask them if they could just fund for teh badge as it easier then the course and saves money, They then said no you must sit the 8 weeks course with us, so we explained the advisor said it was 4 weeks, they reply saying no it has always been 8 weeks and the job centre know this, We inform them unable to do the 8 weeks as i am due to give birth in 6 weeks so wouldnt be able to attend.

the company said they wouldn't take us on the course due to this commitment.

We go back the job centre and tell them what has happened and to access there ADF funding as it would be cheaper then the courses and could have the badge in 4 weeks and get back to work soon after the baby born. A manger comes over with a bunch of security guards and says we do not access the ADF fund as the council are happy to pay for the courses, I then state it not council paying for them it is the TAX PAYER paying for them and im sure they would be happy to know your ok to waste up to £1000 for a course that is not needed, they reply saying that it ok to as the ADF will not be accessed for the renewal of the badge even thoe jobs been offered as the courses will pay.

WE have been informed by all the places that sit the course you can sit the course it between 2 to 8 weeks then be waiting up to 8 weeks to get a cheaque to pay for the badge which already takes 4-6weeks to process.

I have gone further with this in the sense of going to our MP and then he has gone to the Minister of employement and just the other day we got a call from the Job centre asking what we wrote to them for and what it is we wanted the jobcentre to do, we just said to renew the badge with out wasteing our time and the taxpayers money.

We have now been taken of JSA and put on to income support as we expecting we are not happy about this as now we deffo know it will be harder to get the badge renewed, we now lookin at loans to do this, also we have been told by several advisor to claim ESA as one of us has a skin diease we said no we can still work this will not stop us it just means that we can not go for all kinds of jobs due to it, WE STILL WILL NOT CLAIM THIS!! . all we want is to be back in work as since becomein unemployed we have lost everything!. and to top it all off working in Security and getting the SIA badge is not one of our Job goals they not even looking at them when we went to sign on!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

cab dont listen just get told to get on with it, even a manager says same we went mp who has asked us to write to the minister of employement which we have done and now know they have recived it as a young girl rang and aske why we wrote to him and what we want from them?

We told them just to fund the badge with out wastein money we asked what are the requirement for adf she would not say and i quote i am not prepared to go thru this on this telephone call a letter will be sent out. So far we not got the reply just waitin for it

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...