Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • just to be clear here..... the DVLA do not send letters if a drivers licence address differs from any car's V5C that shows the same driver as it's registered keeper.
    • sorry she is a private individual, the cars are parking on her land. she can clamp the cars. only firms were outlawed from doing it bazza. thats what the victims of people dumping cars on their drives near airports did and they didn't not get prosecuted.    
    • The DVLA keeps two records of you. One as a driver and one for your car. If they differ you might find out in around a month when they will send you a reminder as well as to your other half for their car. If you receive nothing then you can be fairly sure that you were tailgating though wouldn't explain why they didn't pick up your car on one of drive past their cameras. However even if you do get a PCN later then your situation will not change. The current PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 which is the main law that covers private parking. It doesn't comply for two reasons. 1. Section 9 [2][a] states  (2)The notice must— (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates; The PCN states 47 minutes which are the arrival and departure times not the time you were actually parked. if you subtract the time you took to drive from the entrance. look for a parking place  park in it perhaps having to manoeuvre a couple of times to fit within the lines and unload the children reloading the children getting seat belts on  driving to the exit stopping for cars pedestrians on the way you may well find that the actual time you were parked was quite likely to be around ten minutes over the required time.  Motorists are allowed a MINIMUM of ten minutes Grace period [something that the rogues in the parking industry conveniently forget-the word minimum] . So it could be that you did not overstay. 2] Sectio9 [2][f]  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN does not include the words in brackets and in 2a the Act included the word "must". Another fail. What those failures mean is that MET cannot transfer the liability to pay the charge from the driver to the keeper. Only the driver is now liable which is why we recommend our members not to appeal. It is so easy to reveal who was driving by saying "when I parked the car" than "when the driver parked the car".  As long as they don't know who was driving they have little chance of winning in court. This is partly because Courts do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person. And because anyone with a valid motor insurance policy is able to drive your cars. It is a shame that you are too far away to get photos of the car park signage. It is often poor and quite often the parking rogues lose in Court on their poor signage alone. I hope hat you can now relax and not panic about the PCN. You will receive many letters from Met, their unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors threatening you with ever higher amounts of money. The poor dears have never read the Act which states quite clearly that the maximum sum that can be charged is the amount on the signs. The Act has only been in force for 12 years so it may take a  few more years for the penny to drop.  You can safely ignore everything they send you unless or until they send you a Letter of Claim. Just come back to us if they do send one of those love letters to you and we will advise on a snotty letter to send them. In the meantime go on and enjoy your life. Continue reading other threads and if you do get any worrying letters let us know. 
    • Hopefully the ANPR cameras didn't pick up the two vehicles, but I don't think you're out of the woods just yet. MET's "work" consists of sending out hundreds of these invoices every week so yours might be a few days behind your partner's. There is also the matter of Royal Mail.  I once sold two second-hand books to someone on eBay.  Weirdly the cost of sending them separately was less than the cost of sending them in one parcel.  So to save a few bob I sent them seperately.  One turned up the next day.  One arrived after four days.  They were  sent from the same post office at the same time! But let's hope I'm being too pessimistic. Please update us of any developments.
    • New version after LFI's superb analysis of the contract. Sorry, but you need to redo the numbering of the paras and of the exhibits in the right order after all the damage I've caused! Defendant's WS - version 4.pdf
  • 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

I have a friend who has an ESA tribunal soon, help


Carvel
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4268 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

Yes Osdset

 

I already have downloaded that I haven't picked though it all yet but there are particular instances which are similar to his situations. Please read below what I have saw in this.

 

 

Not sure if this recent decision may

 

be useful.

 

In CE/1757/2011 the claimant

 

suffered from mental health

 

problems and alcohol abuse.

 

Judge Levenson agrees in principle

 

with the Secretary of State that

 

needing the use of alcohol to visit

 

new places or engage in social

 

contact can be compared with the

 

use of self-hypnosis or relaxation

 

techniques or anti-anxiety

 

medication.

 

However, he does state that it is

 

matter of degree -

 

“A small glass of beer or lager

 

before going out might be one

 

thing, half a bottle of vodka would

 

be something else.”

 

In the latter kind of case, Judge

 

Levenson holds that Regulation

 

29(2)(b) would be brought into play

 

-

 

“…the claimant suffers from some

 

specific disease or bodily or mental

 

disablement and, by reasons of

 

such disease or disablement there

 

would be a substantial risk to the

 

mental or physical health of any

 

person if the claimant were found

 

not to have limited capability for

 

work.”

 

Judge Levenson outlines that the

 

First Tier Tribunal considered this in

 

the context of the claimant’s

 

attempts at self-harm. In respect of

 

alcohol it stated that “the alcohol

 

problem would not be a risk

 

because on the evidence of the

 

appellant he can function with the

 

amount he consumes for example

 

before he goes out”.

 

However, in upholding the

 

claimant’s appeal and remitting it

 

fore rehearing Judge Levenson says

 

that -

 

“It seems to me that if a claimant

 

has to drink significant amounts of

 

alcohol before going out, even to

 

the pub, and 3 ½ cans of alcohol

 

before facing the First Tier Tribunal

 

then it is incumbent on the First

 

Tier Tribunal to consider whether

 

and how much alcohol he might

 

need to drink before going to work,

 

on the way to work, and while at

 

work, in order to actually work.

 

Significant amounts on a daily basis

 

might well pose a substantial risk to

 

his own health and also (depending

 

on the nature of the work) to the

 

health of others. The First Tier

 

Tribunal was in error in not giving

 

proper consideration to this issue.

 

The new panel must do this.”

 

 

Would I be allowed to use past case hearings within his Submission Document?

 

How is this best applied? This case seems to me to be a powerful arguement for my friend. This is his first tribunal. Is he at risk or would he upset the Judge?

 

thank u

 

Yes you can quote upper tier decisions in the submission document - in fact it is advisable if you can find one that supports your case, as this one appears to. It doesn't upset the judge, as long as it is written respectfully. It is also wise if quoting precedent setting cases to send the submission in advance, so that the judge can obtain a copy of the decision to refer to.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Osdset, Nystagmite and Estellyn

 

You comments have given me confidence for me that I am going in the right direction. I think the use of the case by Judge Levenson is and could effective so thank you.

 

If any of you could help further with the descriptors 14c, 15 a, 15 c, 16 b and 16 c (Nystagmite helped with 6 b and 6 c) it would help me qualify his situation better.

 

thank u

Link to post
Share on other sites

15 is about getting around. What happens if your friend goes out? Think about their safety and safety of others. For example, do they wander off, etc.

 

14 is about coping with change. What happens if changes occur in daily routine? Can they manage with a minor change (such as last minute doctor appointment) ?

 

16 is about social engagement. Can your friend cope with others? Does your friends behaviour cause problems for others? Other people being friends and people they have never met before.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Nystagmite

 

Regards descriptor 15a, he just can't do that at all whilst sober due to social anxiety. Whilst he doesn't pose a danger to others, he would experience a high of anxiety. For example the last time he attempted to leave his front a few months ago, sober, just to go to the outside bin at the back of his block of flats, he experienced this anxiety, and turned back half way down the stairs and ran back into his flat as he felt a panic attack coming on.

 

Descriptor 14 this is a difficult one to qualify he don't really have any changes as such, all his days are all the same.

 

Descriptor 16a he is socially isloated really I only speak to him online (social website) and has no family. He does not engage anyone sober, he avoids it completely and only speaks to neighbours if he bumps into them, just saying hello etc, I brief conversation.

 

He has just had a set back today. The Work Program (voluntarily) alcohol worker cannot take him to tribunal or give any evidence as they are sub contracted by a4e and paid by the DWP. He doesn't want the tribunal to go through on paper evidence as he understands he will not win. The CAB told him they can't go with him. Any suggestions on advocacy?

 

thank u

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Estellyn thank you.

 

I have rang that number before today its rings then goes to a Skype answer machine unfortunately without reply. Maybe they don't exist anymore, I don't know.

 

Going back to the descriptors and as mentioned with his condition. He is essentially 'two people' with regards the WITH ALCOHOL and WITHOUT ALCOHOL. It is difficult to base an arguement with these factors for him. I understand you can only use one but which ones are best to apply?

 

thank u

Link to post
Share on other sites

deleted wrong thread

Edited by osdset

 

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

Hi Estellyn thank you.

 

I have rang that number before today its rings then goes to a Skype answer machine unfortunately without reply. Maybe they don't exist anymore, I don't know.

 

Going back t the descriptors and as mentioned with his condition. He is essentially 'two people' with regards the WITH ALCOHOL and WITHOUT ALCOHOL. It is difficult to base an arguement with these factors for him. I understand you can only use one but which ones are best to apply?

 

thank u

 

Can he do the descriptors without drinking - for instance going out and about? What about socialising, can he do that sober or does he need to drink, what effect does being drunk have on social encounters, can he be aggessive, confrontational difficult? What happens if there is a sudden change he needs to deal with, does this cause him to drink? What type of changes does he have the most difficulty dealing with. What are the long term effects of drinking on his health?

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Estellyn

 

1. He doesn't leave his front door, at all, for any purpose or for any reason if he is sober. His anxiety stops him from doing this, he needs to have drank at least 6 cans of super strength cider before he can leave his front door, and even then he has anxiety.

 

2. He is socially isolated. He cannot engage anyone in any form sober.

 

3. He avoids social contact (physical) i am unaware of any confrontations as such but I am aware he has had some instances. For example when he was in a hostel staff give his personal door key to another resident in error and he was mad.

 

4. As for a change in situation. An example was yesterday. He was advised that his rep couldn't attend the tribunal. I know that affected him deeply as he was drinking more than he would and was not particularly pleasant towards me yesterday in emails.

 

5. He knows that what he is doing is going to kill him long term yet he continues to drink.

 

thank u

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Estellyn

 

1. He doesn't leave his front door, at all, for any purpose or for any reason if he is sober. His anxiety stops him from doing this, he needs to have drank at least 6 cans of super strength cider before he can leave his front door, and even then he has anxiety.

 

2. He is socially isolated. He cannot engage anyone in any form sober.

 

3. He avoids social contact (physical) i am unaware of any confrontations as such but I am aware he has had some instances. For example when he was in a hostel staff give his personal door key to another resident in error and he was mad.

 

4. As for a change in situation. An example was yesterday. He was advised that his rep couldn't attend the tribunal. I know that affected him deeply as he was drinking more than he would and was not particularly pleasant towards me yesterday in emails.

 

5. He knows that what he is doing is going to kill him long term yet he continues to drink.

 

thank u

 

These are the thypes of things you need to include, and tie to best descriptor in each section to describe his issues.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

And if so can you please confirm what descriptors over and above i have mentioned. Perhaps an example of how to word it

 

thank u

 

Sorry if I have missed it in one of your previous post's, but when exactly is your friends appeal date?

 

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...