Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Apologies dx100uk  I did not put the answers in red  Thank you all for your patience. H
    • Which Court have you received the claim from ? Northampton  Name of the Claimant ? Overdales solicitors  How many defendant's  joint or self ?  Self Date of issue – top right hand corner of the claim form – this in order to establish the time line you need to adhere to.  13 may 2024 What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim? the claim is for the sum of £6163.61due by the defendant under an agreement regulated by the consumer credit act 1974 for hsbc uk bank plc. Account 4546384809766042. The defendant faild to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a default notice was served under s 87(1)  of the consumer credit act 1974 which as not been compiled with. The dbt was legally assigned to the Claimant on 23/08/23, notice on which as been given to the defendant.  The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the county courts act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £117.53 the Claimant claims the sum of £6281.14. Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ?   Not to my knowledge. Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred?  No Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ?  Online but it was for a smaller amount they kept on increasing this with me asking Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim.  It was assigned to a debt collection agency  Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? yes  Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor?  Yes I also made offers to pay original creditor a smaller amount but was not replied to Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ?  No Why did you cease payments? I was made redundant and got a less paid job I also spent some time on furlough during covid and spent some 3 months on ssp off work. What was the date of your last payment?  May 2021 Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? Yes at the time I communicated with all my creditor's that I was running out of funds to pay the original agreements once my redundancy money ran out that was when my accounts defaulted. I then wrote to all my creditor's with pro rata offers of payments but debt collectors took over the accounts.
    • Just an update for all. I received about a letter every other week, increasing in threat levels. Then I hadn't had one for a about two weeks, then Saturday received a carbon copy of the very first letter they sent me in February. Made me laugh, rinse and repeat. 
    • So, your response was not received by the SCP as you did not send it with a valid stamp. Therefore, from my two option in post #14, the first option is the only one available to you, but you do not have the option of asking to be sentenced at the fixed penalty level as the reason the SCP did not receive your response was down to you. Here's a reminder of what to do: Respond to the SJPN by pleading “Not Guilty” to both charges. In the “Reasons for pleading Not Guilty” box state that you are willing to plead guilty to the speeding charge providing, and only providing, the “Fail to Provide Driver's Details" (FtP) charge is dropped. This is a tried and tested method to deal with your problem and is almost always successful. Before the pandemic it was necessary to attend court to do this "deal" because it needs the agreement of the police prosecutor.. During the pandemic courts made every effort to have as few  people as possible attend and they began doing this deal under the "Single Justice" procedure without the defendant's attendance. Some courts have carried this procedure on whilst others have reverted to a personal attendance being necessary. If you are required to attend, your case will be taken out of the SJ procedure and you will be given a date for a hearing in the normal Magistrates' Court. If that is the way they do it in the area involved you will have to attend, see the prosecutor and offer your "deal" in person. 
    • what device are you using? copy all the questions then come here to this thread and paste them. then answer each question click on red give answers here. when done  hit submit reply bottom right.  
  • 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

Ingeus


Raven1
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2483 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

  • Replies 6.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Apart from being potentially dangerous in psychological terms, this smacks of a hugely expensive money making wheeze for the NLP 'provider'.

They can brainwash as much as they like, it won't alter the amount of jobs available, pure bunkum.

 

I am not sure whether the pimps need liaise with external provider.... the Administrative Clerk assigned need only read a Cargo Cult Booklet on the new variant of Snake Oil, print themselves off a Doctorate in NLP, and hey presto, invite the unfortunate candidates to view the Administrative Clerk as a defacto expert on NLP.

 

In the West, if someone attempts to practice medicine without possessing a Medical License, we despise them and call them QUACKS.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Had one of their "advisors" suggest something similar to me, and then patronisingly attempt to explain how having a degree would intimidate potential employers. After my initial surprise my response was twofold:

 

1. What would you fill the gap with?

 

2. Why not approach employers who valued what I had to offer? It’s not as if there’s a shortage of them.

 

That more or less ended that discussion. I didn’t even get to mention how unethical and counter-productive to keeping a job lying to a potential employer is – a point just about every decent organisation is happy to reinforce when given the chance. There are better and more honest ways to address the potential of over-qualification.

 

She also pitched hilariously unsuitable (and always low-paid) vacancies at me, and deliberately ignored interview and application feedback I received from my own efforts. This"advisor" is the stuff of comedy legend amongst my family and friends, who metaphorically tore her to shreds to me when they were trying to counteract her negative effect on my self-esteem and confidence. No doubt she’s from a sales background too – may even be the same person. For her, it wasn’t about helping the client into sustainable employment but about maximising the potential for a quick result, presumably so she could collect an Ingeus "Star Employee of the Month" cookie.

 

And Ingeus rewrote my CV when I first started with them, which I then had to rewrite to correct the spelling and grammar in order to make me sound less of an illiterate moron. I later rewrote my own CV, and use that for non-Ingeus related stuff.

 

 

 

I’m lost for words for how utterly moronic an answer that is from your "advisor". It’s very Pauline Campbell-Jones (The League of Gentlemen).

Although Vendor Specific Qualifications are time limited (typified by the plethora of IT Vendor Specific Qualifications - such as MCSE, Novell Certification etc), let alone the issue of "Certification for the Issuance of Home Information Packs", Academic Qualifications retain equity.

 

One of the things that candidates can do to avoid being subject to a plethora of unsuitable jobs is to invoke Due Diligence, and avoid any temptation to sign a Data Protection Waiver - the waiver being entirely voluntary, and the absense of a signature doing nothing to prevent Job Centre Plus from distributing Personal Data to the candidate. The DWP considers all Welfare To Work Organisations to e "DWP Job Centre Data Processors".

Edited by RebeccaPidgeon
Grammar, Subject
Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is, I would have thought that ploughing so much money into them the Govt would need to see evidence of the quality of the training given...maybe even some sort of certifcation of each type of module....by some recognised body perhaps...?

The Coalition are more concerned about less public spending than wiser public spending.

 

Seems at the moment that there is a risk that they could be giving unsafe and unsound advice, teaching poor grammar and communication skills and amending CV styles that do not need help...in short making chances of employment less not more if the person is not able to know what is right prior to the training....and act accordingly. I wonder if prospective employers have noticed a decline in the quality of letters and/or CVs? :|

Indeed. Poor grammar and spelling on applications is one of the biggest (if not THE biggest) moans of employers.

 

And as to helping those who are unwell get back to work.....they seem to be doing the very opposite......making them worse, effecting their mental health....probably putting more burden on NHS.......if not now maybe sooner rather than later....

 

And lowering self-esteem should be the opposite of their aims should it not?:mad2:

Yes, it should. But some see it as a way to make their clients easier to manage so they can further their own ends.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Coalition are more concerned about less public spending than wiser public spending.

 

 

Indeed. Poor grammar and spelling on applications is one of the biggest (if not THE biggest) moans of employers.

 

 

Yes, it should. But some see it as a way to make their clients easier to manage so they can further their own ends.

 

Indeed, employers may noan about poor grammar and spelling. However, if employers aren't part of the solution, do not contribute to any form of training, do not engage with the system then, unfortunately, they remain part of the problem and can only accept what the system delivers.

 

After all, if graduates going to University this year have to absorb £9K Liberal University Fees, ending up with an overdraft of £50K-£60K after 3/4 years study, and do not meet any employer willing to provide either sponsorship or placement, then frankly employers are not in the best position to offer critique over something which they aren't engaged with.

Edited by RebeccaPidgeon
grammaer
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone.

I'm hoping to get some advice.

 

I'm going to go to the Doctors about my anxiety, stress, panic and depression after being told by a lot of people that I need professional help.

The problem is, this Monday I have a workshop with Ingeus (jobsearch skills) and a workshop on Tuesday (interview skills) and then I'm at Ingeus again on Wednesday to see my adviser.

 

I'm getting anxious just thinking about it.

How can I go do the workshops without getting a panic or anxiety attack? I know it's impossible for me, I'll have a breakdown. I need to see the Dr but the thought of explaining to my adviser why I've missed the appointments fills me with dread and I end up with palpitations.

 

Shall I just not go?

It's getting to the point where I don't care if I get sanctioned, I need to get rid of these mental health problems before I do something stupid and Ingeus is one of the biggest contributions to my problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Miss Ayla:

I would attend - play the wall flower. Don't do anything or say anything you are uncomfortable with. Practice saying "I don't feel able to do that just at the moment".

 

Fighting (or even just accepting) a sanction will be a lot more stressful and panicky than just going along with the flow for a while.

 

Good luck!

Edited by Bakatcha
Link to post
Share on other sites

latest update on case that i can find...dated june 27th 2012

link here

 

Yes, I just read it funnily enough.

 

Corruptissima re publica plurimae leges

 

Being poor is like being a Pelican. No matter where you look, all you see is a large bill.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I just read it funnily enough.

 

According to the DWP Representative

“The imposition of a condition on the entitlement to benefit that a person undertakes certain work-related activity does not require a person to perform forced or compulsory labour. The only effect of such provisions is that a person needs to do the required acts in order to be paid a benefit. They are not forced to do those acts.”

 

If any candidate is assigned to any Mandatory Work Activity, told to report a place of business, and to work under the explicit direction of a company employee between (say) Monday-Friday 0900-1700 hrs, through which skills are delivered to stakeholders, then the candidate becomes a defacto employee.

 

I have yet to be subject to any form of Mandatory Work Activity YET.... however, if I were ever to be placed in this position, and irrespective of whether the work was relevant to my career interests, I would discuss the issue with someone within the Citizens Advice Bureau and/or Legal Advice Centre, and see whether legal action could be instigated at a local level.

 

The legal action would address two distinct issues.

Firstly, calling for a judicial review.

Secondly, submitting a claim for at least the National Minimum Wage to be paid, plus payment of National Insurance and Tax, let alone damages.

 

I seem to recall that a Judge had recently decreed that no-one may disregard the National Minimum Wage where work is concerned, and that that workers ma not waive their rights for payment. According to the National Minimum Wage Act 1998

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/39/section/1

 

Workers to be paid at least the national minimum wage.

1) A person who qualifies for the national minimum wage shall be remunerated by his employer in respect of his work in any pay reference period at a rate which is not less than the national minimum wage.

2)A person qualifies for the national minimum wage if he is an individual who—

(a)is a worker;

(b)is working, or ordinarily works, in the United Kingdom under his contract; and

©has ceased to be of compulsory school age.

(3)The national minimum wage shall be such single hourly rate as the Secretary of State may from time to time prescribe

(4)For the purposes of this Act a “pay reference period” is such period as the Secretary of State may prescribe for the purpose

Link to post
Share on other sites

“The imposition of a condition on the entitlement to benefit that a person undertakes certain work-related activity does not require a person to perform forced or compulsory labour. The only effect of such provisions is that a person needs to do the required acts in order to be paid a benefit. They are not forced to do those acts.”

talk about double speak......certain work related activity does not require a person to perform forced or compulsory labour....but the person needs to do the required acts in order to be paid a benefit..they are not forced?.....or in other words no one is forced to do it but if you dont you will lose your entitlement to benefit....I am reading that correctly am i not?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Secondly, submitting a claim for at least the National Minimum Wage to be paid, plus payment of National Insurance and Tax, let alone damages.

 

OK in principal, but one must bear in mind that the claimant would have to come off of JSA for the length of the placement, and do a rapid re-claim at the end, the employer cannot pay wages while a claimant is in receipt of benefit.

 

This could get rather complicated in the case of follow on mandatory placements, far better to get rid of MWA all together.

 

Corruptissima re publica plurimae leges

 

Being poor is like being a Pelican. No matter where you look, all you see is a large bill.

Link to post
Share on other sites

“The imposition of a condition on the entitlement to benefit that a person undertakes certain work-related activity does not require a person to perform forced or compulsory labour. The only effect of such provisions is that a person needs to do the required acts in order to be paid a benefit. They are not forced to do those acts.”

talk about double speak......certain work related activity does not require a person to perform forced or compulsory labour....but the person needs to do the required acts in order to be paid a benefit..they are not forced?.....or in other words no one is forced to do it but if you dont you will lose your entitlement to benefit....I am reading that correctly am i not?

Absolutely. But, that is precisely the position of the Legal Representative for the DWP towards the case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK in principal, but one must bear in mind that the claimant would have to come off of JSA for the length of the placement, and do a rapid re-claim at the end, the employer cannot pay wages while a claimant is in receipt of benefit.

 

This could get rather complicated in the case of follow on mandatory placements, far better to get rid of MWA all together.

Given that neither Labour nor Conservatives will eradicate the MWA directly, the only way that it can become so restricted and superfluous is to restrict its use for the claimant.

 

In the first instance, if a candidate is solely dependent on JSA, and they are coerced into a MWA Assignment, then they would not be able to sign off (lest they face destitution). But, legal options would include a full Judicial Review (which is what Public Interest Lawyers are doing in the case of Cait Reily and a second plaintiff on a Community Programme), and also taking the employer to small claims court (for example) to claim for damages.

 

If the candidate is occupying a job in everything but name, ie requires to apply skills to deliver services to stakeholders, then given that the candidate may not waive their right to receive National Minimum Wage, they may (as in the case of Unpaid Interns who have won substantive damages) claim financial redress from the courts comparable to the Salary, Tax and National Insurance which would be paid to any employee for the work done.

 

If, in accordance with the growth in MWA, an increasing number of candidates pursue legal claims, then a consequence may be that employers may extract themselves from any relationship with MWA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Welfare-to-work firms call for more unemployed to have benefits sanctioned.

 

Story http://intensiveactivity.wordpress.com/2012/07/01/welfare-to-work-firms-call-for-more-unemployed-to-have-benefits-sanctioned/

 

Corruptissima re publica plurimae leges

 

Being poor is like being a Pelican. No matter where you look, all you see is a large bill.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In reply to the above posts, I think they should make all of us dole **** sweep the streets for our dole money, we could all wear a high-vis vests with dole **** on the back like the community payback offenders have to, I'm sure that would keep all the taxpayers and do-gooders happy, and the pimps would get their well deserved income too, it wouldn't be any more humiliating than having to attend job searches and "courses" at their offices.

Keep smiling it makes them wonder what you're up to.

 

Now on a more sensible note I have been mandated to attend a Job action group, mock interview video, (I have attended one course with interview techniques not sure what the difference will be) they have asked me to attend dressed for a formal interview, during the job action group I will have "the oportunity to recieve advice guidance and informal training on effective job searching activities in a group environment" I do not like to be told how to dress, at 56 I can dress myself suitably when needed, I think they expect me to attend in a suit, wich I will not because I'll be arriving on my motorbike, so have an excuse for being clad in leather, It reads like they may be videoing the the mock interview, again I am going to refuse to have this done to me.

 

And of course I have been threatened with sanctions in my letter should I not attend, anyone else had any experience like this?

 

By the way I am waiting to hear from a prospective employer for my induction so I'm almost employed, (temporary job) I have not yet told Ingeus and I managed to get this job without their help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

they have asked me to attend dressed for a formal interview,

 

What about going dressed as Ronald McDonald? You could always argue that as 'burger flipping' would be the only realistic opportunity offered by the pimps, you have turned up dressed appropriately.

 

Corruptissima re publica plurimae leges

 

Being poor is like being a Pelican. No matter where you look, all you see is a large bill.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What about going dressed as Ronald McDonald? You could always argue that as 'burger flipping' would be the only realistic opportunity offered by the pimps, you have turned up dressed appropriately.

 

:-D:-D:-D, you are right although my advisors (or the ones that I have dealt with) seem a lot more caring than the others on here they really have not done anything to help me get a job probably because there is nothing suitable for me and I've told them that I don't want an entry level opening,

If this job doesn't come off though I might just have to hire a ronald suit.:-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally would go dressed in the worst clothes i could lay my hands on.....they cannot mandate what you wear...and hey who knows you may get a nice new interview suit out of them...but wouldnt hold my breath...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I got a new suit out of them already was offered early on when I started with them, as I have said my advisors aren't too bad with me maybe because I am older than most of them and am really looking for a job, looking at some of the clients they have are I'm sure are not too keen, but I will not take any s**t from them and I think they know this, they do not own me.

I could do with some new "Doc Martin" work boots:-D I wonder if I dare ask and some work clothes as well.

In my last group talk with one advisor he did ask if everyone was ok for interview clothes etc, has nobody had anything from these poeple or am I the exception if Ingeus are making thousands out of me getting a job I think that they should give me all the encouragment that they can as they should everyone else who has to go through the indignity of having to attend these places.

Dare I say which office I attend? I'll say I'm in Derbyshire for the moment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dare I say which office I attend? I'll say I'm in Derbyshire for the moment.

 

I wouldn't be any more specific since there's probably enough in your other posts to identify you if you give an exact location.

RMW

"If you want my parking space, please take my disability" Common car park sign in France.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I got a new suit out of them already was offered early on when I started with them, as I have said my advisors aren't too bad with me maybe because I am older than most of them and am really looking for a job, looking at some of the clients they have are I'm sure are not too keen, but I will not take any s**t from them and I think they know this, they do not own me.

I could do with some new "Doc Martin" work boots:-D I wonder if I dare ask and some work clothes as well.

In my last group talk with one advisor he did ask if everyone was ok for interview clothes etc, has nobody had anything from these poeple or am I the exception if Ingeus are making thousands out of me getting a job I think that they should give me all the encouragment that they can as they should everyone else who has to go through the indignity of having to attend these places.

Dare I say which office I attend? I'll say I'm in Derbyshire for the moment.

Could be worse - I think Derbyshire is also a4greed territory so you may have drawn a winning ticket in the WP lottery.

Link to post
Share on other sites

500,000 sanctioned for not taking jobs? I didn't think there where even that many jobs available. Or are they sanctioning 1000s for each job available; I can't beleive that many people are offered a job and all refuse to take it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Had one of their "advisors" suggest something similar to me, and then patronisingly attempt to explain how having a degree would intimidate potential employers. After my initial surprise my response was twofold:

 

1. What would you fill the gap with?

 

2. Why not approach employers who valued what I had to offer? It’s not as if there’s a shortage of them.

 

That more or less ended that discussion. I didn’t even get to mention how unethical and counter-productive to keeping a job lying to a potential employer is – a point just about every decent organisation is happy to reinforce when given the chance. There are better and more honest ways to address the potential of over-qualification.

 

She also pitched hilariously unsuitable (and always low-paid) vacancies at me, and deliberately ignored interview and application feedback I received from my own efforts. This"advisor" is the stuff of comedy legend amongst my family and friends, who metaphorically tore her to shreds to me when they were trying to counteract her negative effect on my self-esteem and confidence. No doubt she’s from a sales background too – may even be the same person. For her, it wasn’t about helping the client into sustainable employment but about maximising the potential for a quick result, presumably so she could collect an Ingeus "Star Employee of the Month" cookie.

 

And Ingeus rewrote my CV when I first started with them, which I then had to rewrite to correct the spelling and grammar in order to make me sound less of an illiterate moron. I later rewrote my own CV, and use that for non-Ingeus related stuff.

 

 

 

I’m lost for words for how utterly moronic an answer that is from your "advisor". It’s very Pauline Campbell-Jones (The League of Gentlemen).

Thanks, good to know that I'm not alone. That's a wonderful reply re qualifications, what am I supposed to fill the gap with indeed. I assume, by directing me towards low-paid jobs, she hopes that their recruitment staff doesn't check dates match etc, ie they are as uneducated as her. She also deleted my referees, has done this twice, and have only realised why - might be intimidating for a potential employer to ask references from someone who has much higher status than them.

Oh god, who know, my advisor is tiresome and certainly lowering my morale and confidence, utter disgrace. Perhaps they do want jobseekers to go on to ESA rather than jobseekers-allowance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...