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

camerons latest missive


debt4get
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4331 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 153
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Ah you see there's the misunderstanding. It's never been about actually trying to get them back into work, it's just a weak excuse to throw as many people off benefits as they can.

 

Remember ATOS is the company telling claiments they're well enough to work, whilst informing their potential employers that they're too sick to be taken on.

 

So It's a no win scenario imo.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That to me is not the way things are done.

 

Lucky we're not all you then, eh? :) And yes Mikey I totally agree with your take on it.

 

What has happened to society?

 

The f*ing Tories took over thats what.

Edited by sadone
Link to post
Share on other sites

And continued the policy started by Labour to hack into benefits entitlement...

 

I'm sorry, I thought that was a given. All the parties are the damn same these days, and thats the truly scary thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Saw this online......

 

New Statesmen have published a response to Cameron’s attack.

 

With these words, Cameron is perpetuating the biggest myth about housing benefit: that it is a benefit for the unemployed. The truth is that just one in eight claimants is out of work (not a statistic that you’ll find reported in most papers). The majority of those who claim housing benefit, including the under-25s, do so to compensate for substandard wages and extortionate rents. A recent study by The Building and Social Housing Foundation showed that 93 per cent of new housing benefit claims made between 2010 and 2011 were made by households containing at least one employed adult.

 

It is meaningless of Cameron to claim that the housing benefit budget is “too large” without considering why. The inflated budget, which will reach £23.2bn this year, is the result of a conscious choice by successive governments to subsidise private landlords rather than invest in affordable social housing. Yet rather than addressing the problem of stagnant wages and excessive rents, Cameron, in a bid to appease his querulous party, has chosen to squeeze the already squeezed.

 

Oh dear......:(

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well imo Cameron is utterly, utterly wrong. :D

 

Great cartoon in todays Guardian about this.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cartoon/2012/jun/24/david-cameron-welfare-reform?CMP=twt_gu

 

Why do we now have this massive benefit system that probably 65% of the population take money out of?

 

I suspect you don't actually know the real figure, do you?

 

Wages are geared to market forces. The more that you can offer an employer, the greater the wage. Not everybody is on NMW. I read day in day out about how low is NMW. It is low because the employer has plenty of choice as to whom to employ. get a qualification and some work experience under your belly and the wage will go up.

 

I'll give you an example. A friend of mine (29) qualified as a solicitor and had a salary of £35,000 a year. He decided to specialise, taking 2 years to complete the course and was offered three weeks ago on the strength of word of mouth, with no formal interview (just coffee and a chat at lunch time) a new job with a salary of £65,000 a year!

 

A wage is equal to the effort that you put in. No employer will want to lose a key worker, a good worker and would be more than willing to agree to a better wage.

 

Thats not exactly what I was asking hon. The DWP let you start early today then? :D

 

A wage is equal to the effort that you put in.

 

Oh and this bit? Utter b*llocks imo. Sorry If you truly believe that then there's no hope for you love. Try talking to some Teachers for a start, to say nothing of low paid jobs such as cleaners.

Edited by sadone
Link to post
Share on other sites

Why then was the original Act written that way? Maybe they could forsee that if they had have left it open ended, everyone and anyone would be climbing on board looking for some money - just like it is now!

 

 

In your opinion. There, fixed that for ya. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you had the right type and level of qualifications AND have experience gained either through previous paid employment or voluntary work, you would find a job quite easilly.

 

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa* *pants* *Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!

 

Oh god love you hon, you're a great comedian. :D The DWP should pay you more ya know. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why? Isn't it a fact that if you are qualified and have enough experience you are more likely to get a job over someone that has drifted around on benefits for a few years?

 

You don't get out much do you?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cameron is such a hypocrite. He moans about how many claim benefits. He claimed DLA for his son. Apparently, the 38 page form is easy to fill in, no medical evidence is required and you just fill in a piece of paper.

 

Am I missing something here? I've just spent the last 6 weeks filling in a 38 page booklet and am waiting on medical evidence to send in.

 

Quite frankly, it's the most depressing thing ever. :(

 

Yes, Cameron a millionaire claimed DLA for his son, even though he obviously didn't need to. Now this b*stard is trying to take this very benefit off those who really need it and aren't ya know, rich b*stards.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well It's started. :(

 

Outrage and shock after man sets himself on fire outside Birmingham job centre

 

http://www.birminghammail.net/news/birmingham-news/2012/06/29/reaction-outrage-and-shock-after-man-sets-himself-on-fire-outside-birmingham-job-centre-97319-31288482/

 

How many more people will be driven to such desperate measures?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had an idea;

 

Wouldn't it be good if we could arange for the 500,000 people who will be losing their DLA to leave their cars at Downing street for collection?

 

 

That would be bloody marvelous. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

And Camerons propaganda machine rolls on unchallenged...

 

NHS charging and rationing 'may be needed'

 

"More rationing of care and charging for services in the NHS need to be considered as it faces at least a decade of austerity, experts say.

 

The review did not go into detail about how these measures could be implemented.

 

But Nick Seddon, of the think-tank Reform, said international evidence suggested imposing charges for services such as seeing a GP could be extremely effective.

 

And Anita Charlesworth, chief economist at the Nuffield Trust, said if these options proved "too difficult politically or too damaging to vulnerable groups" health spending would have to fall in real terms."

 

I'd like to say I'm stunned, but sadly with the buggers in power at the moment I'm not. They're obviously using the excuse of the recession to attack not only the welfare state but the whole concept of the NHS.

 

We're now going to be headed back to an era when people unable to afford to visit their own GP. Disgusting. :(

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-18694119

 

And the Guardians take on this.

 

"Health service: surviving a lost decade"

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jul/03/health-service-surviving-a-lost-decade?CMP=twt_gu

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh I dunno. It's like the whole bloody county's on valium or something, but then the clamp down when it comes to main stream reporting isn't helping to get the info out there is it really.

 

This cruel welfare system is steadily crushing lives – where is the anger?

 

"Which brings us to revelations that appeared over the weekend, and the latest news about the government's increasingly brutal welfare-to-work drive. Thanks to research by Corporate Watch and an article in the Observer, we know that the private companies involved in the government's Work Programme have been pushing for unbelievable numbers of people to have their benefits cut, aiming at figures that even the ever-more stringent Jobcentre Plus regime has refused to sign off.

 

Meanwhile, there's a clear sense that in the context of a flatlining economy, the Work Programme's targets – indeed, its entire logic – are proving impossible: the scheme's core presumptions were based on economic growth of over 2%, and a revived job market. Given their non-appearance, the companies involved look they're getting desperate, and in the absence of any convincing carrot, frantically reaching for the stick."

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jul/03/cruel-welfare-system-private-firms?fb=native&CMP=FBCNETTXT9038

Link to post
Share on other sites

Honesty I wonder what It will take for people to actually wake up from their collective stupor and rebel against this injustice? I mean the whole country can't be so well off that they feel secure in knowing they'll never need any kind of state help, surely?

Link to post
Share on other sites

they think its all down to effort rather than other reasons such as financial.

 

Or luck/privilege for that matter.

 

 

Thus heralds the next government con trick, maintain the flow of NI and spend hardly any of it.

 

Exactly. :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...