Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have just located the fees being charged.   They are:  4/11/20client admin fees £60 no dates available for these fees: PDC Instruction fee £240 PDC additional costs: £10  
    • let us guess....i bet we all know...
    • Which bailiff company was involved ?    
    • If you mean the variable speed limits imposed you will have to contact the Highways Agency.   If you have a Notice of Intended Prosecution for an alleged speeding offence and you ask for "photographs to assist in identifying the driver" you will usually be given a link to show the photographs taken from the gantry. Most cameras are designed so that a secondary photo of the gantry display is taken at the same time.
    • Thank you both.    I was not sure how much info to load at first.  Will therefore clarify better below :  Full year service charge:£2205.82 (1/5/20-30/4/21) I then paid various instalments, totalling to date : £1483.56 Two refunds were made from Firstport, for service charge credit adjustments of: £273.91 Outstanding amount : £448.35   As mentioned in my first post,  I did miss August. I did not receive a payment plan, so have carried on paying regularly. I received no ‘default’ paperwork until 4 November when a letter arrived from Firstports debt agency. PDC with demands for payments and extra fees/fines.    I have emailed PDC about 8 times since, together with lots of phone calls.  They have put my file on hold a number of times, to investigate further. Always coming back to me with incorrect information. They said I was emailed on 30th October, with a link to Firstport’s online portal saying I had missed a payment and to take a look at my account on-line. I have this email which was sent by Firstport on 5th November   A day after, the debt collectors had posted a letter.  I have explained it all to PDC again, in yet another email that they are incorrect. No answer as usual. 
  • Our picks

    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 31 replies
    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1268 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Gil, Most of it seems made up... it seems to say I have no English or Maths qualifications and also I have never worked self-employed. There seems to be information on questions I've never been asked about. It says on one sheet I have a full up to date CV and on another it says I have no CV.

 

Sexual Orientation = 0 WTF does this mean??

 

Internet Use = not at all

 

Then there is only a third page that has more than one line of writing on. It crammed with tiny letters and lots of info. I'm reading with great interest. Looks like all the times my data was accessed by someone. Must be about 200 entries. All of which contain a member of Ingeus' name except two which state 'web user'. :/

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 6.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Did anyone know that A4e has also landed another Contract to give Money Advice at my local Council, and probably many other Councils. I have a Neighbour that I have been advising on Banking Matters and Account Managment - I have been sourcing information I was not sure of and advising successfully so far. When I saw the Notice in the Council Offices I thought I would look into it to see if he could get more informed advice than I could give.

 

On reading the Notice I realised that at the very bottom it stated that this Service was given by A4e how dare they :mad2::mad2::mad2: - I wonder how many of the Advisors are CRB Checked. Needless to say I will not be advising use of this Service. Having to give all your Bank Details will give them chance to practise their Signature Forging Skills. Watch this space to see if the usual abuse starts to come to light with regard to this very dubvious service. :mad2::mad2:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Gil,Most of it seems made up... it seems to say I have no English or Mathsqualifications and also I have never worked self-employed. There seems to beinformation on questions I've never been asked about. It says on one sheet Ihave a full up to date CV and on another it says I have no CV.

I’m guessing that in the absence of you providing info that they made it up either because their system is unable to progress or just to make it look as though they hadn’t struck out.

 

SexualOrientation = 0 WTF does this mean??

Totally hetero, if you’re using the Kinsey Scale. However, I suspect for Ingeus it simply means they don’t know which way you swing. Not sure why sexual orientation is relevant to employment in anything other than pointless stats though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd do two things..

 

Firstly I'd make sure I was recording the entire interview process.

 

Secondly, given the nature of the job you are being forced to attend interview for, I would make sure that I asked many detailed questions regarding the nature of possible chemical and biological hazards that the job may put you in contact with.

 

I would ask what form of liability insurance the employer has and the amount of coverage it offers in the event of a chemical or biological contamination due to the nature of the work

 

I would also ask for the employer to cover costs for Hepatitis & Tetanus vaccinations. Maybe make a point to ask what employee sanitation (showers/laundry) is available at each site...

 

I'm sure you could put the fear of litigation into them with a few other choice questions :D

 

Excellent advice. I think I'll attend tomorrow and do exactly this. I'll also raise travel costs as an issue as well as some other things which may come up. If worse comes to worst and they still offer me the job, by refusing it I surely can avoid being sanctioned by JCP on the grounds that the job would see me haemorrhaging money left, right and centre correct? Work Programme schemes only benefit if I actually get a job right? Simply having a job offer, which I rejected wouldn't see them make a penny out of me would it, even if it was directly through them?

 

Then instead of pulling a sicky to avoid the CV writing course I'll inform them I need to keep myself available for a pending interview on that date, which wouldn't exactly be entirely untrue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@RealName..

 

There's also the DWP's own guidelines on travel to work which would mean that any commute to site outside the stated 90-minute limit could be defined as unreasonable

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the matter of advisors offering payments and/or sanctions to get a client to sign the employer-consent forms and get their hands on the outcome payment, I wondered if this could be used as a blunt instrument to add to complaints..

 

Fraud Act (2006) Section 4 - Fraud By Abuse Of Position

 

1)A person is in breach of this section if he—

 

(a)occupies a position in which he is expected to safeguard, or not to act against, the financial interests of another person,

 

(b)dishonestly abuses that position, and

 

©intends, by means of the abuse of that position—

 

(i)to make a gain for himself or another, or

(ii)to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.

 

(2)A person may be regarded as having abused his position even though his conduct consisted of an omission rather than an act.

 

Link: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/35/section/4

 

One very good reason to covertly record all your meetings/phonecalls to use as evidence if required!

Link to post
Share on other sites
@RealName..

 

There's also the DWP's own guidelines on travel to work which would mean that any commute to site outside the stated 90-minute limit could be defined as unreasonable

Ah I should read up on this. Cheers.

 

I might also raise that I get queasy rather easily if the opportunity allows it. Simply being close to the toilet on board a train sets me off. Being inside a port-a-loo, never mind cleaning one, will cause havoc. I'm sure I can phrase that in a way which won't make it seem as though I'm sabotaging the interview. I could ask if they have any measures to prevent this.

 

One very good reason to covertly record all your meetings/phonecalls to use as evidence if required!

I'm not sure covert recordings would be beneficial as they wouldn't stand up as evidence in a court of law. You need to have the person's consent in order to use it. Of course the work programme companies will surely refuse to let you do so...

 

Interestingly enough my local JCP have banned the use of laptops, mobile phones and anything else that could be used as a recording device inside their building. This wasn't an issue prior to A4E being outed...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure covert recordings would be beneficial as they wouldn't stand up as evidence in a court of law. You need to have the person's consent in order to use it. Of course the work programme companies will surely refuse to let you do so...

 

My advisor first offered me a £100 payment if I signed the employer consent. I declined to agree with this and stated that I'd get the JC+ £100 back-to-work bonus anyway. They then stated that that payment was dependant on 'a statement from the provider that I was complying with the work programme' and if I was determined not to be, wouldn't recieve it.

 

They then offered to give me £200 in total for 'forgetting my principles' and signing the form. I still disagreed. Then they informed me that the provider would recieve the outcome payments regardless of my declining to sign, and that I could be sanctioned upto 6 months on my NI contributions if I or my employer refused to confirm employment status..

 

They'd have not said anything had they willingly agreed to the meeting being recorded. And whilst perhaps not admissable in a court of law, the ICE may well accept it as evidence to back up a complaint.

 

Otherwise it's just our word against theirs, and we know which way the decision would swing in that case..

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not sure covert recordings would be beneficial as they wouldn't stand up as evidence in a court of law. You need to have the person's consent in order to use it. Of course the work programme companies will surely refuse to let you do so...

 

It could be argued to be within the publics interest.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I could be sanctioned upto 6 months on my NI contributions if I or my employer refused to confirm employment status..
Well they obviously can't retrospectively sanction your benefits because you have already been paid them, as for NI credits, I have not managed to find out anything about this apart from someone who is not receiving benefits in the first place due to wife working or similar, who gets a sanction on NI as thats the only benefit element they are getting, personally I would call their bluff, a 6 month loss of NI is no big deal anyway.

 

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
Delightful day with Maximus today. My advisor looked through my CV and was impressed with it. His only complaint was that he'd have put the longer personal statement about my interests at the start rather than the end. Personally I disagree with this as the employer would surely want to know my skills more than my interests, which I already have in my opening paragraph. Despite this I've been placed on a three hour long CV writing course next week to show me how to reorder my CV.

 

Despite applying for more than the number of jobs I'm required to apply for a week they're also forcing me to attend an interview there tomorrow for an incredibly unsuitable job. It's a company who are looking to hire people to clean port-a-loos throughout the country. One day your in Southampton, the next Leeds, then on to Newcastle, etc. The company don't cover your travel expenses (which will be about the same as your daily pay if not more), but they do provide you with accommodation. A large tent to share with the other employees. So on top of spending all my wages on the travel I'd be required to spend more money on a hotel for the night. I pointed out the unsuitability of such a job to my advisor, but of course he didn't care. He told me that I'd receive a benefits sanction if I didn't attend the interview tomorrow. Unfortunately I forgot to record our conversation, so it will just be a case of my word against his again.

 

As I disagree with both of these things for obvious reasons I refused to sign the action plan. Is it possible to get out of attending either of these things which are both clearly nothing but a waste of time?

Have you got any proof that the Maximus gave you this job 'opportunity'? Because I would love to see the reaction from the w2w pimps over on Indus Delta to this nugget, but without any form of validation they would simply say the story is made up to discredit the industry.

 

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

@gil_jnr

They'd have not said anything had they willingly agreed to the meeting being recorded. And whilst perhaps not admissable in a court of law, the ICE may well accept it as evidence to back up a complain
It is evident that recording all interviews/exchanges is important. I seem to remember reading (I think in DWP guidance) that:

1. Customers are allowed to record conversations either overtly or covertly

2. If the recording is overt i.e. the advisor knows, or should know, that a recording is being made he has a duty of care to ensure that other conversations nearby are not inadvertently recorded. Therefore the advisor must ensure privacy.

3. The recording should be for your own personal use - as an accurate record of what occurred. It is not legal to publish such recordings (e.g. on U tube) without the participant's permission (copyright issues)

4. Although a recording itself may be inadmissable as evidence (e.g. in an appeal against a sanction doubt) what is permissable is a transcript of a recording.

 

I think the above is correct but if anyone knows any better then I am open to correction.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Have you got any proof that the Maximus gave you this job 'opportunity'?

Other than today's interview, which I'm hoping to record, no. The only document I've been provided with about it simply tells me that it's an interview. It doesn't even specify that it's a job... I was provided with very little information about today. I'm still unsure as to whether it's simply a job interview, or if I have to sit through a presentation prior to this. I know that I don't have a set interview time and there'll be a number of people attending at 13:00. The piece of paper I was given to look at while I was there didn't even mention the company name. Part of me is wondering if this is in fact a mock interview they've disguised as a real one as the job just seems too horrendous to be real.

 

I'm still a little unsure about whether or not I should attend. While I was told I'd receive benefit sanction if I didn't attend I didn't sign the action plan to agree to it and I'm not sure if this gives me any strength to not attend or whether it's still a requirement. I also sent a letter last week requesting that they remove my personal data. I haven't heard anything back yet, but when I was there yesterday I saw that they still had the data on their system. I don't know how long I should expect it to take for it to be removed, but it seems as if I might have to take legal action against them soon and I wonder if this would exempt me from visiting them until the issue is resolved.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Today's "interview" was not an interview at all. All that happened was a manager gave me a form to fill out with a large number of pages. I informed her that before filling it out I'd like to take it home with me and get consultation on it. She then told me that if I didn't fill the form out there and then my benefits would be sanctioned. She refused to let me record the conversation of course. This is my third visit to Maximus now and on every occasion I've unlawfully been told that my benefits WILL be sanctioned if I don't do something. I have the names of the people who have made these threats, but sadly I have no evidence and it's just a case of my word against theirs. Today's incident was done in front of two other jobseekers. However, when I asked them if they'd be willing to confirm that the manager did indeed make such a threat they both said that they wouldn't be willing to do it. What is the next step I have to take to make a complaint against Maximus? I think I should at least try and do something even if it is unlikely that something will be done.

 

She said that on Tuesday I have to meet her at a train station so that she can purchase a ticket for my long travel to the actual interview on Wednesday. As I've been given nothing in writing I shall just claim to not have been informed about this. As it happens I've genuinely forgotten both the time I'm supposed to meet her on the Tuesday and the time of the interview on the Wednesday. I also have no idea where the job interview is supposed to take place other than the name of the city. So it looks like I couldn't go even if I wanted to. My action plan only mentions having to attend the "interview" on Friday. It makes no mention of me being required to do anything else regarding this "job opportunity".

 

As suspected anyone who applies for the job will automatically be given it. The manager said that all you had to do was fill out the form and attend the interview and you'd be guaranteed the job regardless. Flicking through the form the job looks even more delightful than I first expected. They expect the employees to pay £130 for their own uniform! You're also required to give over your bank details before even being offered the job. Wow. Just wow.

Edited by RealName
Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the many problems with the WP is that they do not understand about sanctions and have no intention of learning abot the coorect proccess either.

Sanctions are threatened left right and centre but as a JCp customer service officer I am fully aware within the guidance that there are procedures to be followed and reason to refer for a sanction.

With regards to the "you will be sanctioned if you don't attend this appointment/interview/take this job" I would personally love to attend their offices to observe these interviews so I could actually witness to tell them how sh** they are.

You can only be referred for failing to attend the interviews, or for an entitlement doubt if you do not actively particiapte in meetings or do not satisfy the conditions of JSA e.g availability or ase.

The only time you can be referred for a consideration on refusing to apply/or to take a job offer is if the vacancy jas been matched as per your JSAg/action plan and that they have taken the correct steps (and as they can't even get the basics right it's odds on they wouldn't have a hope of doing this).

 

I hope they do read this and realise they are not performing as they signed up for through their own incompetence.

Canyou tell I had a bad day at work for a start and that WP wre partly to blame!!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe I've managed to find the correct procedure for making complaints myself. First I make a complaint to the work programme provider, then if I'm not happy with the response or I don't hear from them for eight weeks I make a complaint to ICE. It seems as this raises another complaint as I should have been informed about the complaints procedure by them rather than having to work it out for myself. The closest I have to them informing me of it is a 4 page A5 booklet (or a double-sided A4 booklet folded in half (whatever you'd call it)) which on the back specifies how I go about passing on feedback. No mention of the word 'complaints'. It seems as though I possibly have an additional complaint about my work programme provider for not providing me with this information.

 

As Maximus have teamed up with CDG I'm confused about which company I should be making the complaint to. Maximus sent me my initial, and so far only, letter, but it is CDG who I have attended the induction, a meeting and a so called "interview" with. I assume I'm supposed to complain to CDG as these are who I've been dealing with directly. However, all I can find on their website is this page: http://www.cdguk.org/contact-us

 

It says "If you have compliments, suggestions or complaints about any of our services, please let us know by using the suggestion boxes in our centres, by emailing or by calling the number below". While an address is listed it doesn't specify that I can use this to make my complaints, which strikes me as a little odd. Should I stick with sending a letter with recorded delivery? It seems to be the best way of proving that I sent the letter and it was received. But as this isn't specified as being a way of making a complaint...

 

Something else has just hit me. During my induction there was a form with a number of checkboxes at the top, which were required to be checked if I was informed of various things during my induction. As I was dragged off into another room to speak to a manager due to my not wishing the data protection waiver I missed the vast majority of the presentation, only witnessing the very end of it as it was being wrapped up, which provided me with no useful information whatsover. Anyway, on the bottom of this form I was asked to put my signature and I did so. I made a point of asking if I was supposed to check the checkboxes as my advisor addressed the corresponding points but he informed me that it didn't matter as that section didn't need to be filled out. It's possible that there was more on the page then just the checkboxes and an area for my signature, but I can't be 100%. The only thing that I can be sure of is that not a single checkbox was checked at the time I signed it. I'm now wondering if these checkboxes were filled in after I signed the document. If this did happen would this be considered forgery? If so how should I go about getting a copy the document so that it can be used as evidence. I worry that if I requested a copy of it they might realise exactly why I wanted a copy of it and would refuse to do so. One of these checkboxes may have been one saying that I had been informed about the complaints procedure. By having signed this document and then it having been altered afterwards I'm not sure how a complaint that I wasn't informed of the complaints procedure would stand.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Realname, you have every right to covertly record all meetings, and you can hand a transcript of the recording over, in say, an official complaint to the DWP, or in a court/tribunal. A Judge can also request to hear the actual recording. This is Legislation/Law, absolute rights that we hold.

 

How much would a return train ticket to this job cost you every day?

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites
how should I go about getting a copy the document so that it can be used as evidence. I worry that if I requested a copy of it they might realise exactly why I wanted a copy of it and would refuse to do so.

 

Anyone can make a Subject Access Request to any organisation that holds personal information on them under the Data Protection Act. You cannot be penalised for doing so, nor do you have to disclose your reasons for making such a request.

 

If you decide to do so, it may be a good idea to send it via the post office 'signed for' service (you use the Royal Mail 'track & trace' facility online to see exactly when it was delivered and get a screenshot of the name & signature of the person who signed for it on delivery) to the head office who will pass it on to their Data Compliance office. The local office you attend will not have any notification you are doing so and try putting you on the spot with questions as to your intentions.

 

There's a number of SAR templates available on this website that you could use, I'm in the process of drafting my own for my complaint and will be happy to post my version on here if it will help anyone else.

 

In the meantime I'd suggest having a few trial runs with your recording device to see how best to hide it and record any further meetings to back yourself up :)

 

ETA: The http://www.consent.me.uk/letter/ website has an excellent template letter you can use to withdraw any previously signed forms for consent to share data or contact any future employers to obtain outcome payments.

 

Again, you cannot be sanctioned for doing so, nor do you have to give any explanation for your withdrawal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.guardian.co.uk/soci…..government

Work-for-free programme to be expanded by government

 

DWP plans to extend its scheme which forces the long-term unemployed to take unpaid work or lose benefits

 

At the moment, those out of work are obliged to take an unpaid placement for a month or lose their benefits. Photograph: Matt Cardy/Getty Images

 

Thousands more unemployed people will be forced to work for free or lose their benefits under controversial plans to be announced by the work and pensions secretary, Iain Duncan Smith, as the government is warned its drive to get people back into work appears to be floundering.

The scheme, under which the jobless are obliged to accept an unpaid work placement for a month to keep their benefits, will be "significantly extended" within the next two weeks, according to Whitehall sources.

The government believes forcing people to work or lose their benefits is inculcating a work habit in the 10,000 people currently on the programme and will be effective for others.

Ministers are also looking at rolling out a national trial under which the unemployed must work for up to six months for free to avoid their benefits being docked.

However, The Observer has learned that a release of statistics on the outcomes of the mandatory work programme had been due this week but is to be delayed, raising concerns about its efficacy in helping the country's 887,000 long-term unemployed – defined as being jobless for over a year.

Critics also claim the move is an indication of the panic within government over the failure of ministers' various schemes to tackle long-term unemployment, which is at its highest level in 16 years.

Last week, the Employment Related Services Association, the trade body for welfare-to-work providers, warned for the first time that its members may not meet the government's "minimum" targets in getting people back into work. It revealed that fewer than one in four of the people who had been on the work programme for six months had found a job.

Labour claims a House of Commons Library analysis shows that initial government estimates of Department for Work and Pensions spending on jobseeker's allowance and housing benefit have been revised upwards by £9bn, as the number of people coming off benefits has halved in the last year.

The number of people claiming housing benefit has also shot past the five million mark for the first time, with more than 90% of new claimants since the 2010 general election being those in low-paid, part-time work.

 

 

and it rumbles on work for free for months or lose your benefits...will they never learn

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...