Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Friend Committing Benefit Fraud


stardust1
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4342 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

This is a matter for your own conscience to decide.

 

Some people, get in a mess, they panic, they commit small scale fraud, but its nothing really major, just people in a corner making the wrong decision, we get a lot of it on here, I cannot condone it, its illegal, and it hurts all of us, but the person doing it, isnt really malicious, just being bloody stupid.

 

Then we have the people like in the OP's post. Willfully, gleefully, happily, committing wholesale planned fraud of several benefits, purely to live an easy life, whilst severely ill people are dying waiting for appeals as ATOS failed them at medical, whilst people made redundant who want to work struggle to survive on JSA, and go through the slave labour programmes.

 

I have never been keen on the idea of informing, mainly because of all the abuse that is going on due to the anonymity. my first example, I wouldn't inform on them, I don't think. I would just advise them very strongly to come clean, as they will get caught.

 

But, People like in the OP's post. Absolutely, without hesitation, inform the DWP. This is effectively "organised crime" if you see what I mean. These are the real parasites that need disinfecting out of the system, to protect the rest of us.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 131
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

To be completely honest, if she has acknowledged to you that she knows she's committing fraud, I would be very inclined to report her.

 

Normally, I'd be as on the fence as you are because I'm less interested in the little people clocking up a few thousand in fraudulent claims than I am in the Fat Cats who clock up millions in tax avoidance etc. However, we are at a point in time where people with genuine illnesses are being forced back into unsuitable work - if they can't get money from the State then I'm blowed if she should be allowed to.

 

These people committing organised/planned fraud, those who do it clear of mind and with willful intent, rather than those who panic, or feel backed into a corner - they are absolutely identical to the fat cats, except for the actual financial figures involved. And for all the wrong they did, much of what the fat cats did was, sadly, Legal. These major defrauders however, every single thing they are doing is illegal.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand why things cannot be set so that one HAS to identify oneself when reporting someone for fraud, but, if it gets to court, the defendent and their legal team do not get to see the identity of the complainant.

 

I would imagine this would cut malicious and unfounded reports right down. Especially if there could be sanctions for making a false report - wasting DWP/potentially Police time etc.

  • Confused 2

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...