Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Well we can't predict what the judge will believe. PE will say that they responded in the deadline and you will say they don't. Nobody can tell what a random DJ will decide. However if you go for an OOC settlement you should still be able to get some money
    • What do you guys think the chances are for her?   She followed the law, they didnt, then they engage in deception, would the judge take kindly to being lied to by these clowns? If we have a case then we should proceed and not allow these blatant dishonest cheaters to succeed 
    • I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.  
  • 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

Can anyone answer this please


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4783 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 all, my husband has not worked for 19years due to ill health and severe mobility needs, he is now 57 and is getting very stressed about the changes to the benefits which are being almost daily in the media. He currently gets IB/IS/and DLA but, he has been told that at 60 he could be paid pension credits does anyone know if this is right? If this is right does that mean he will no longer get his other benefits and that he will no longer have to attend medicals and fill in those dreaded ib50`s? Sorry for so many questions but I can`t get my head around this as they say people should have to wait longer for their pensions then he is told this. Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

not knowing full ins and outs of new legislation, but have some knowledge of old Pension credit, I think thats right if so he should be no worse off in fact he may still get some disability benefits on top so may be better off. No he shouldn't have to undergo medicals anymore as he will be classed as retired, this was the old system (went through it with inlaws) however not up to speed on new benefits so i may be wrong not much use eh?

I know my rights Mr DCA I'm with the CAG......hello hello where you gone Mr DCA8)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its changed slightly , I.S used to be paid up to the customers sixtieth birthday and on their birthday they went onto penson credit automaticallly, now they are transferred across on a series of qualifying dates , we have a few of these dates each year.. The last date applicable date was 7th March, on that date if you were sixty then you went across. to penion credits... Pension Service write out and tell you the exact date and make the transistion smooth so there are no worries..

 

So he may be on I.S till slightly over sixty.. However IB is ending soon so he will be transferred over to ESA and then rules may change again

Link to post
Share on other sites

as things currently stand, your husband will reach the qualifying age for pension credits in approximately 6 years

 

if his date of birth is between 1 - 5 august 1953, he will reach qualifying age on 6 november 2016

 

if his date of birth is between 6 - 31 august 1953, he will reach qualifying age on 6 january 2017

 

(this is assuming he is older than you - if you are older than him, then you may achieve qualifying age earlier, and as a couple only one of you has to achieve the qualifying age to move on to pension credits)

If you have found my post useful, please click on the star at the bottom of my post and add some reputation points.

Link to post
Share on other sites

as things currently stand, your husband will reach the qualifying age for pension credits in approximately 6 years

 

if his date of birth is between 1 - 5 august 1953, he will reach qualifying age on 6 november 2016

 

if his date of birth is between 6 - 31 august 1953, he will reach qualifying age on 6 january 2017

 

(this is assuming he is older than you - if you are older than him, then you may achieve qualifying age earlier, and as a couple only one of you has to achieve the qualifying age to move on to pension credits)

 

That loophole is to be scrapped. In future both parties (husband & wife etc) will have to have reached an age where they BOTH are entitled to the OAP. This will stop claims when the wife is say 62 and the husband 55. In this example it is intended that Pension Credit can only be claimed when the husband is 65 and the wife 72, or 68 & 75 depending on when they raise the retirement age! At the moment in that example, they could have claimed Pension Credit when he was 53 and his wife 60.

 

This will have the effect in that example of making the husband claim JSA and look for a job until his normal retirement age. A sensible thing really. You really shouldn't have a male retiring at 53 in that example, claiming Pension Credit which is an enhanced payment over JSA/ESA, when he has at least another 12 years or working life still in him.

 

The same will apply for IB/ESA, he will have to prove that he is unfit for work for another 12 years.

Edited by SueP1944
Link to post
Share on other sites

Suep1944

 

Not heard anything about the change you mention, do you have a link to information on these changes?

If you have found my post useful, please click on the star at the bottom of my post and add some reputation points.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Suep1944

 

Not heard anything about the change you mention, do you have a link to information on these changes?

 

Sorry that I have not been back earlier.

 

This is taken from the WRB

 

Welfare Reform Bill Explanatory Notes:

 

Page 22

145. Paragraph 64 amends the State Pension Credit Act 2002 so that a member of a couple who has attained the qualifying age for state pension credit may not receive state pension credit if the other member of the couple has not attained that qualifying age. This is to ensure that all claimants who have not attained the qualifying age for state pension credit are required to claim universal credit and, if appropriate, be subject to work-related conditions of entitlement.

 

And in the Welfare Reform Bill itself,

 

"Quote"

Page 113

State Pension Credit Act 2002 (c. 16)

 

Paragraph 64 In section 4 of the State Pension Credit Act 2002 (exclusions), after subsection

(1) there is inserted—

 

“(1A) A claimant is not entitled to state pension credit if he is a member of a couple the other member of which has not attained the qualifying age.”

 

This effectively stops the current situation of a man reaching 61 and his wife who is 55 being able to claim Pension Credit. Both have to be of the normal retiring age, currently 65, increasing to 68 for a male and 61 increasing to 65/68 for a female, before a claim can be accepted.

 

Until both reach the normal retirement age they will be required to either claim JSA and look for work or have a claim accepted for ESA after an assessment. (JSA & ESA are to be combined under Universal Credit)

Edited by SueP1944
Link to post
Share on other sites

you may think it sounds sensible to close this, but it worries me

 

there is a 16 year age between me and my partner, so if we pretend there will be anything left of the welfare state when i reach retirement age at 68 and if my partner was out of work, we would have to make a joint claim for JSA/UC?

 

hmmm...

 

so i would have to be available for and actively seeking employment until i am 84, oh, what a prospect

If you have found my post useful, please click on the star at the bottom of my post and add some reputation points.

Link to post
Share on other sites

you may think it sounds sensible to close this, but it worries me

 

there is a 16 year age between me and my partner, so if we pretend there will be anything left of the welfare state when i reach retirement age at 68 and if my partner was out of work, we would have to make a joint claim for JSA/UC?

 

hmmm...

 

so i would have to be available for and actively seeking employment until i am 84, oh, what a prospect

 

That would seem to be the case unfortunately.

 

The only reason I can think that they have come up with this change, is that anybody claiming JSA (not so much ESA as they don't regularly see anyone from the DWP) is currently being pushed over to Pension Credit by the Jobcentre when the first party reaches the qualifying age.

 

This has meant that people are being written off the unemployment register far too early. It can't be right that a male who gets to 61 automatically gets his benefit without having to sign on or produce evidence of disability. Especially if his wife is a lot younger than him - she is also written off.

What they seem to be saying is that until you reach the normal retirement age you WILL either have to continue to look for work or prove a genuine sickness why you can't do any type of work.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is about this new change comming to Pension Credit about couples is that if you are 60 and single you will still be able to claim Pension Credit and not have to look for work.

This is totally biased towards single people.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is about this new change comming to Pension Credit about couples is that if you are 60 and single you will still be able to claim Pension Credit and not have to look for work.

This is totally biased towards single people.

 

That is how I read it also. However the retirement age is now 61 and will increase gradually until it gets to 68.

 

It is certainly biased towards the single people - maybe that is the answer - get divorced, live apart and have the privilidge of claiming Pension Credit!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...