Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Marcus will cut the rate on its easy-access savings account to 4.55% from Saturday - can you find better rates elsewhere?View the full article
    • Legal claim alleges Steam's market dominance means consumers are paying too much for video games.View the full article
    • In-person collaboration has been linked to high performance and job satisfaction, but these benefits don't increase with more days spent in the office.View the full article
    • We need to see the actual document from the IAS where it is written - "The Operator's evidence shows no payment for the Appellant's vehicle, or anything similar. It does show two payments for the same registration in quick succession. I would take a reasonable guess, based on the circumstances described, that the person paying has paid for the registration of the person they assisted again." You can't just type it up yourself. At the hearing in July or August or whenever the judge will have two Witness Statements. One from Bank's director says you never made a second appeal. You say you did make a second appeal and the IAS concluded that payment was made. The judge will immediately twig that either you or the director is lying.  But who? Fail to show the documentation form the IAS and instead just produce something you've typed yourself will make it look like you just made up the appeal and you are lying and you will lose the case. Please let us see what the IAS adjudicator sent.
    • I used to have a retail outlet in London selling my husband's photography.  We also had a co-op with staff so they weren't directly employed by me, but I paid for the other overheads etc.  When my husband died, I carried on as usual for a while but then I became ill and moved quite far away so logistically was becoming very difficult.  I came to an arrangement (verbal) with one of the guys I trusted, that I would send him the images to print and sell as normal, and I wouldn't take any money, as a short term solution until I got back on my feet and worked out the best way to do things. He would pay all the  rent, insurance etc... Over a year later, not able to give things away for free anymore,  I drew up a contract as a wholesale agreement, so I would get everything printed and sent to him and I would invoice his for what he ordered. I noticed form the beginning that he wasn't ordering enough or frequently enough to be making any money, and was suspicious he was doing his own orders on the sly and ordering just enough from me to keep my happy.  I checked with my printer, which I've been with for 20 years, and he sad he wasn't getting orders for my images from anyone else. I emailed a few other printers to ask them to keep a look out for some images but I soon realised this would be impossible to police.  The only option really would be to buy a print from him and check the stamp on the back of it.  I finally managed to get hold of on the prints on sale, and sure enough, he did not order it through me.   In the contract he signed in 2022 it explicitly states that he must destroy all files I had previously sent him etc etc so e is in breach of that.  When I drew up the contract, I was careful to make sure it was legally binding, but before I let rip at him, I need to know where I stand.  The contract is here: PARTIES This WHOLESALE AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made effective as of 30th June, 2022, by and between ############################## The Supplier and the Client, collectively referred to as the "Parties," hereby agree to the following terms: TERMS AND CONDITIONS SALES OF GOODS The Supplier agrees to provide the following goods to the Client (“Goods”): Description of Goods ################################# Doc ID: 3d54c1d336d8780243801e0e068ebd33114b088b BOTH PARTIES AGREE: The Client purchases the Goods through the Supplier directly, and agrees to delete/destroy any previously held digital images (Goods) owned by the Supplier, and agrees not to use any such files for monetary gain, outside of this agreement, either directly or through a third party from immediate effect of this agreement. The Client purchases the other materials necessary for resale of the Goods independently of this agreement. The Client shall have exclusive rights for resale of Goods at ###########, and also with permission, as a retailer of the Goods elsewhere, provided that there is no conflict of interest between the Supplier and the Client. The Client is free to decide their own retail prices, for the Goods. The Supplier shall use #####  to provide the printed Goods on Fujifilm Crystal Archive paper, with Lustre finish, and will not use any other Printer unless #### cease to trade, without prior approval from the Client. The Supplier shall not impose restrictions on size or frequency of orders made by the Client. The prices provided by the Supplier shall not increase for a minimum of 3 years, unless the prices of the raw materials rise, in which case the client will be informed immediately. Any discounts/promotional prices of raw materials shall be passed on to the Client by the Supplier, and the invoice will show adjustments for this, as well as credit for return postage of any damaged goods. This agreement can be terminated by the Client without notice; the Supplier must give notice of no less than 90 days, unless the terms of the agreement are breached, in which case, the agreement can be terminated with immediate effect. PAYMENT Orders must be paid for upon receipt of invoice, via Bank transfer: ######### Doc ID: 3d54c1d336d8780243801e0e068ebd33114b088b DELIVERY AND INSPECTIONS All orders received by 12.00am (midnight) shall be processed by the Supplier the following working day and delivery of order shall arrive in accordance with the Royal Mail schedule, or DPD, should express delivery be requested. The Client shall be liable for the delivery charge which shall be added to the invoice. The Goods will be delivered to the address specified by the Client. The Client shall be provided with order tracking, and should any problems arise with the ordering system or the couriers (Royal Mail, DPD), the Client shall be informed without delay of any such issues. The Client will inspect the Goods and report any defects or damage to the Goods in transit as soon as possible upon receipt of Goods, and will retain damaged Goods for return to Supplier for refund/replacement. GENERAL PROVISIONS CONFIDENTIALITY The prices of the Goods and other information contained in this Agreement is confidential and will not be disclosed by either party unless with prior written consent of the other party. INDEMNIFICATION The Client indemnifies the Supplier from any claims, liabilities, and expenses made by any third party vendors or customers of the Client. GOVERNING LAW This Agreement will be governed by and construed in accordance with UK Law. ACCEPTANCE Both parties understand and accept the wholesale arrangement stipulated under this Agreement. Doc ID: 3d54c1d336d8780243801e0e068ebd33114b088b IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the Parties has executed this Wholesale Agreement as of the day and year set forth above.   Signed by us both electronically.   I haven't broached any of this yet, and I am looking for some advice about what action to take.  The main issue I've got is that he has still go those images.  If I terminate the contract, I will need to know that he no longer has those images and I can't think of a bulletproof way to do this. I'm thinking I might tell him I will continue with the contract but ask for a  sum in damages and say that if I find out he's still doing it down the line I will terminate the contract and sue him for damages. The damages side of things I'm not sure how it would work as he is self employed, and I'm positive he doesn't declare all of his earnings to HMRC, in order to find out how much I have lost, would the court demand to go through his tax self assessments?  I'm not sure how to proceed with this, I don't want to lose that place as an outlet as it is in a prime spot in London, which is why I let him have those images in the first place as I would have had to pull out altogether at that point.  I am regretting it somewhat now though.  Please help.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Dispatches: Britain on The Sick


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4327 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 will also cost the NHS money and I'm sure many will turn to crime.

That fits in rather well with the ATOS thing last night where the HCP said 'if they can use one finger they can work' One fingered pickpockets! The only problem is they will have to concentrate on Polo mints.

 

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

  • Replies 123
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

After watching these programmes I am so thankful that my migration from IB was completed without the need for a WCA. It has also made me determined never to suffer the humiliation and pain of a WCA. I am fortunate in having an underlying entitlement to carers allowance for my wife who is over pensionable age. So if I am not put into the support group again when i send back my next ESA50 form, I'll just go onto carers allowance with any shortfall made up by pension credits.

 

As i have said before I really feel for the young and am so worried for my children and grandchildren.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't know that, Antone. I knew that inpatients were exempt from the assessment though.

 

I have to admit that I Understand Grayling saying that we shouldn't just leave people on sickness benefits for years. But at the same time, they're going the wrong way about it. Sending people for assessments with long-term incurable conditions is pointless.

 

Talking from personal experience, there seems to be next to no help helping disabled people back into work. I think this is what's needed. I know many disabled people who want to work and don't want to claim benefits; but there's no help at all for them out there. The work programme has been no help at all. Especially as in my case, they decided they know my disabilities better than I and my consultants do.:-x

 

 

Neither did I!!!!

 

Had my ESA assessment, just before I went into hospital - was given 0 points. The fact that I was in hospital never featured in the claim!

 

As for DLA (yes I know it's off subject) but I think relevant. I failed to complete the renewal forms as I was in hospital on that occasion for over 3 months - half in intensive care, and it took another two years after discharge for me to start eating again and feeling any part 'normal.'

 

The DLA claim was closed down obviously but more importantly, the reasons I gave for it not being completed in time were not accepted - I had not shown good cause for the entire 27 months.

They would not back date the claim.

 

Likewise with the IIDB claim - this too expired at the same time as the DLA claim. It took until 2011 for me to convince the DWP that I had been entitled to IIDB from 2004. They accepted this and sent me a letter in November last year telling me that they had awarded IIDB at the 40% rate from Jan 2004 - Jan 2014 - but with no back pay obviously!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to really stare down the hole and start realising that it takes two to tango. It's a contract that both parties negotiate and have to fully agree on. So.... who is the monkey and who is the organ grinder? Well the organ grinder is neither as it is UNUM backed by the insurance companies. The monkeys get; jobs and jollies galore for MPs and ATOS is on a promise of a very lucrative new market to break into.

 

Get your tinfoil hats on and read this thread http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=4095693

 

The problem with all these new initiatives (the prime example is Work Program) is the black box approach i.e. we don't care what goes in, what happens in the box, only what comes out. As there's no regulation of what goes on in the box, contracts are awarded on cost and you can bet your bottom dollar, that it will be the lowest form of help if any. What goes on is (as we see with the WCA and WP) then shrouded in the complete carp that is contractual confidentiality and the removal of the right for private individuals/organisations to scrutinise it with for example FOI requests.

 

Last night was a start but we can't take break. We need to keep up the pressure and keep this issue in the spot light. If we don't then some firemen will be on the news saving a cat up a tree and the fickle public will not care when the anti disabled propaganda machine kicks back in.

 

The government (each party is pretty much the same now) are to blame for making descriptors designed to take people off of benefits.

 

Atos are to blame because they take those descriptors and then designed an assessment intended to get as little information relevant to the descriptors as possible - using the theory that if if they don't hear the right information in the assessment, then they are not required to pass them. They try to avoid recording assessments as much as possible, because on the recorded assessments they have to ask the questions differently and allow the claimant to speak. The worst offenders doing the assessment will ignore anything additional said by the claimant and just use the statements from the drop down menus in the computer program, rather than write additional info in provided boxes for additional information. a 20 minute assessment is not long enough to be able to do anything but use the drop down menus. my two assessments were well over an hour - I made it clear from the outset that my previous job was a benefit rep dealing with appeals, which had the assessors frantically writing every word I said in additional info boxes - I had to keep pausing while they caught up typing the infomation in.

 

The DWP are to blame because they are responsible for the final decisions. Decision makers should be looking at the IB85 and using their common sense - if its just drop down menu statements then it was a bad assessment. They should be giving weight to information from GP's, consultants etc, rather than blindly rubber stamping the ATOS assessments.

 

The government are to blame for not taking notice of rate of successful represented appeals - or if I was cynical, I would say they did take notice, and this is part of the reason why they have pushed the legal aid bill - no legal aid representation for benefit matters means far fewer reps being employed and available to help wth appeals, therefore fewer successful appeals.

 

the government are also to blame for encouraging this prejudice against the sick and disabled and for obfuscating statistics to make it look like many esa claimants are faking.

We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office ~ Aesop

Link to post
Share on other sites

That fits in rather well with the ATOS thing last night where the HCP said 'if they can use one finger they can work' One fingered pickpockets! The only problem is they will have to concentrate on Polo mints.

 

Surely they would be able to apply for a grant for one of those grabbers the council litter pickers are so fond of using?

 

Just think of the options that would open up for them then.

 

The dole queue's would be slashed at a stroke.

Link to post
Share on other sites

After seeing the inter-departmental correspondence Timms told the Guardian that the emails appeared to show Grayling's answer was wrong, adding that the government was "ignoring the needs of disabled people".

"Many people are finding they have to appeal against wrong decisions on their disability benefits. With cuts to legal aid, it will be harder in future for them to get help. Now DWP ministers are stopping people even from seeing a video that might help them, produced by the Ministry of Justice. They also appear to have given an incorrect answer to my parliamentary question. This looks like a department that is losing its grip and ignoring the needs of disabled people."

 

 

 

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/jul/31/minister-accused-video-disability-claimants

Link to post
Share on other sites

The programs have made me realise how hopeless I feel for myself and all the others who are affected.

 

 

They haven't just moved the goalposts, they have buried the goalposts.

 

 

.

then we have to keep digging until they appear again...working people unfortunately have no idea of what is actually going on except the papers, press, etc constantly reminding them of the 'scroungers' it isn't till it affects them, when they have an illness or accident, they suddenly realise that the system ain't working

Link to post
Share on other sites

harrington going has done the gov no favours, my dad rang me today and told me he found it very suspicous he was sacked after the panaroma comments (my dad sees it as sacking without me putting those words in his mouth).

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

And did anyone else think Chris Grayling looked decidedly shifty when he said he categorically denied there had been any targets set by either DWP or ATOS. .

 

Yes CG didn't like the fact that 40 % of people are winning there appeals and even had the cheek to criticise the judges decisions...

 

Chris Grayling, on the successful appeal stats: "I think you have to look at why the appeals are successful. I wish the Judges sometimes looked beyond the first impression and thought is it really the case that these people could not return to any form of work". .

 

I felt like throwing the telly at CG when he said that,he just doesn't get it,does he !

 

far too frequent reassessments etc. .

 

CG did say this had been looked into and reassessments should be cut down !

 

Think the programme which showed the GP who filmed his ATOS assessor training gave quite an insight into this.

 

That polish doctor kept saying system was "Toxic" why she still training for them or has she had the push by now ?

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

 

 

Please take some Valium before reading,OK

 

It seem the top two runner for the contract and running of PIP is between

 

is

 

G4S and ATOS

 

Does G4S ring any Alarm bells with you !

 

http://www.disabilitywales.org/1168/3843

 

 

I can see Dispatches and Panorama doing a series of programmes in the future if G4S win the contracts :jaw:

 

Now have a read of this

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/election/article-1280554/The-coalition-millionaires-23-29-member-new-cabinet-worth-1m--Lib-Dems-just-wealthy-Tories.html

 

Makes you sick,when there are cutting benefits for serious ill and disabled people who do need help...

 

They will never have any money worries....................

Edited by 45002

Please use the quote system, So everyone will know what your referring too, thank you ...

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Please take some Valium before reading,OK

 

It seem the top two runner for the contract and running of PIP is between

 

is

 

G4S and ATOS

 

Does G4S ring any Alarm bells with you !

 

http://www.disabilitywales.org/1168/3843

 

 

......

 

 

I read the shortlists and to say the very least it is horrifying.... the shortlist for my area:-

 

Lot 1 – Scotland, NE England, NW England & Isle of Man

 

 

  • Avanta Enterprises Ltd ..... An employment recruitment agency
  • Ingeus Deloitte Limited...... Well you only have to read the post dedicated to them on this forum
  • APM UK Ltd........ An Austrailian/New Zeraland run firm, the only one that shows any information that they are already in this field....
  • Capita Group PLC... Buisness process outsourcers?
  • Reed in Partnership.... yet another recruitment agency
  • G4S Integrated Services (UK) Ltd... well we all know how responsible these lot are.....
  • Atos Origin...... This lot are our waking nightmare
  • Vertex Ltd.....I Googled these and the only services that they appear to provide are building ones so maybe all disabled people should be looking to become brickies or such like.... I would be very interested if anyone else can find out anything else....

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was once told that ATOS did IB assessments too. Why didn't we have this level of problems with appeals and assessments then? Ok, some would have needed to appeal and we will never have a perfect system.

 

They did do the IB assessments - problem NOW is that ESA and the assessments are specifically designed to get people OFF the "sick" benefits. As the training lady on Dispatches kept saying.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This shouldnt be privatised full stop.

 

Also capita bidding is a conflict of interest as they run the welfare advice hotline thats given out on benefit cease letters.

 

I wonder how much money has really been saved if any when you addup what these companies get paid and the cost of tribunals.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chris Grayling, on the successful appeal stats: "I think you have to look at why the appeals are successful. I wish the Judges sometimes looked beyond the first impression and thought is it really the case that these people could not return to any form of work".

 

Considering my ex-husband didn't even have to attend his appeal TO WIN IT (the judge reviewed his case and overturned it before the court(?) even 'opened for business' that day!) I doubt there's much - if any - "first impressions" going on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just caught up with the Dispatches programme on C4od. Whilst the BBC one was good, Dispatches was even more so. Very shocking. With ESA and PIP, it looks like I picked a really bad time to get ill...

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seem the top two runner for the contract and running of PIP is between

 

is

 

G4S and ATOS

 

Looks like contracts have been given:-

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/aug/02/atos-disability-benefit-tests?INTCMP=SRCH

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/government-computing-network/2012/aug/03/pip-atos-capita-dwp-disability?INTCMP=SRCH

 

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has awarded contracts to Atos and Capita to provide Personal Independence Payment (PIP) assessments to replace the Disability Living Allowance (DLA).

Atos has been awarded two of the three lots, for Scotland, north east and north west England, as well as London and southern England, with Capita gaining the other contract covering Wales and central England.

A further lot has still to be confirmed through the Northern Ireland Social Security Agency. The total value of the Atos and Capita contracts is estimated to be £540m over five years, with Atos' share about £400m and Capita's £140m. The overall cost of the scheme is some £700m, which is likely to include the cost of any refinement to IT systems to deliver and process the assessments and signpost other relevant benefits for claimants.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just caught up with the Dispatches programme on C4od. Whilst the BBC one was good, Dispatches was even more so. Very shocking. With ESA and PIP, it looks like I picked a really bad time to get ill...

 

You certainly have!!

 

ATOS & Capita are now to run PIP.

 

God help those that are having to claim these benefits - me, I'll be off to the food bank on Monday and join the queue then pop in to one or two charity shops for a pair of shoes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If people still believe there will be such a thing as the welfare state in a few years time must be living in a dream world.

 

Governments around the world are taking full advantage of the 'credit crunch' and slashing the welfare bill into oblivion.

 

I predict there will be no such thing as a disabled person in this country in ten years time, possibly less.

Edited by frank_begbie
Link to post
Share on other sites

I predict there will be no such thing as a disabled person in this country in ten years time, possibly less.

 

Re-classified as 'defective' or 'not fit for purpose' ? Perhaps the next initiative will be to terminate a foetus that does not come up to specification unless the parents can guarantee independent financial support and ensure that the abomination is kept locked away so as not to offend the rest of the 'master race'.

 

We can then focus attention on pensioners, after all they have served any useful purpose and are now surplus to requirement, and a financial burden, just queue in an orderly fashion at the local euthanasia centre when you get the official notification.

 

Rest assured it won't happen in the UK, after all, we are a caring compassionate people that look after the vulnerable in our society......Aren't we?

 

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...