Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yeah I figured, unlikely I'll need credit anyway mortgage all paid off etc so I'll take that on the chin and learn from the experience. Probably would've beaten that too had I remembered the protocol, first time ever going through the process though sob it wasn't familiar to me  Oh well  
    • This is my slightly amended WS taking on board your previous comments, any suggestions for amendments would be most appreciated.  Thank you for you time.   1.        I am the Defendant in this matter. 2.        The facts in this statement come from my personal knowledge. 3.        I became aware of original Judgement following a routine credit check on or around 14th September 2020. 4.        The alleged Letter of Claim dated 7 January 2020 was served to a previous address which I moved out of in 2018, no effort was made to ascertain my correct address. 5.        The Judgement debt was not familiar to me so I began investigations to ascertain what the debt related to and how such a figure had been equated in any event. 6.        I made immediate contact with the Court, the Claimant Solicitors and the Claimants thereafter, asking them to provide me with a copy of the original loan agreement but this was not provided to me.  7.        I sent a Data Subject access Request to Barclays but no agreement was provided – See appendix 1 which details the timeline of communication between myself and Barclaycard as well as copies of correspondence between us. 8.        I do not admit to entering an agreement with Barclaycard in 2000. 9.       The claimant has failed to comply with the additional directions ordered by District Judge Davis and therefore this claim should be automatically struck out.  10.    The claimants have failed to disclose a true executed copy of the original agreement they refer to within the particulars of this claim. They are not entitled to enforce the agreement pursuant to section 78.6 (a) of the Credit Consumer Act 1974 12.   The reconstituted standard Barclaycard agreement that the claimant has included in the court bundle does not satisfy any CCA request and so the claimant is and remains in default of my CCA request and therefore unable to enforce the alleged agreement. 13.  The claimants have failed to provide proof the assignment, such as a deed of assignment. 14.  The claimant has failed to provide a statement of account setting out how the alleged debt accrued under that agreement 15.   Despite numerous requests to the claimant, I have still not seen any evidence, such as an original agreement or deed of assignment, that substantiates the claimant’s assertion that I owe the debt to the claimant, nor evidence of how the debt was accrued. 16.   As per CPR 1.4(2)(a) the court encourages parties to cooperate with each other in the conduct of proceedings in order to try and save time and costs for the parties and to also save the time and resources of the court however, despite vast attempts at mediation the claimants have been most unreasonable and have remained unwilling to mediate. I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.  I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.
    • A set aside application costs £275 which is more than the judgement so not worth it. Not that they would grant a set aside anyway.  Set asides are granted, for example, to people who moved and didn't get the court papers, so have a genuine reason for not defending.  Forgetting doesn't count. Your only choices are to pay up within 30 days, or defy the court and not pay.  If the latter, we've never seen a PPC enforce judgement for a single ticket, ever, you would get away without paying - but you would have a CCJ and a knackered credit file for six years.
  • 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

birmingham city council fairer charging team


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4549 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

Hello guys hope you can help unfortunatly my grandad has been in hospital for 3 weeks now his dementure is getting worse so the hospital have issued a section 5 which means the social services are now in control and will be charged every day that my grandad remains in hospital.

We met the lady from social services today' she has given us the form (birmingham city council fairer charging team).

I think it assess my grandparents for everypenny that they spend so they can look at the incomings and outgoings

I wondered if anyone could help on the sort of things that are taken into consideration

 

thanks in advance

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is the information from their website :)

 

http://www.birmingham.gov.uk/cs/Satellite?c=Page&childpagename=Adults-and-Communities-General%2FPageLayout&cid=1223092710456&pagename=BCC%2FCommon%2FWrapper%2FWrapper

at the bottom you have the policy document and the information leaflet which explains in quite a simple way how they would work out their finances for fairer charging assessment

 

Hope this is of some help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi do you know if they are looking at assessing for contribution for homecare in the their own home or residential care? Usually they can have different ways of assessing this for these 2. I work in a different council but in a dept that deals with financial assessments as well for adult care.

yes its for homecare not residential

Link to post
Share on other sites

In that case the link is correct as that would be done under the councils fairer charging policy, I have not read the whole document myself but general rule they will make sure that the person who is being assessed has all benefits they should be getting (if not they can send off a referral for any additional benefits they think they may be entitled to and arent getting at the time) and they will look at all income. Currently the ceiling for savings in £23,250 per person which if they have over and above this amount in savings or capital they have to fund their own care in full. Some councils cap the max amount they need to pay up to but not all. Below that they will look at income (benefits, pensions, dividens, shares etc) and outgoings which will be utilities, any disability related expenditure (ie something they have to have because of any disability they have that an average person would not have to have as an expense for example some people would have a pendant alarm (lifeline), stairlift, specialist furniture for example) again how much they can take into account (and whether anything is capped up to a certain amount) depends on the policy/council so you would need to check their details on this. Basically they then calculate the income less expenses less protected income which is set by government as the basic amount any person of certain age (ie under 60, over 60 etc) would need for their everyday living expenses and then usually if there is anything left that may be their contribution towards their care. Best thing would be to read through the information leaflet and have a look at the policy to make sure how birmingham council assess this as it does vary :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically they then calculate the income less expenses less protected income which is set by government as the basic amount any person of certain age (ie under 60, over 60 etc) would need for their everyday living expenses and then usually if there is anything left that may be their contribution towards their care. Best thing would be to read through the information leaflet and have a look at the policy to make sure how birmingham council assess this as it does vary :)

 

I'm sure I read somewhere that they ignore the amount the law says you need to live on, (including disability premiums, etc) + 25%?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, I think it varies by the council as each can have their own policy but according to the policy doc for birmingham council they also have the 25% buffer on top of the protected income which is excluded when contribution is worked out. Only thing to look out for now is to see what changes in April 2012 as there may be changes to a lot of these policies, Im sure that the council I work for has changed some of the policy from April following a public consultation that was carried out a while back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...