Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I posted a reply earlier which I have now deleted because I realise that I hadn't read your story correctly. You have laid out £1000 on repairs to a vehicle which according to you is probably in need of further repairs. Although you have been rebuffed by the dealer at your first asking, your position would be much better had you provided the quotes for the repair work to the dealer in advance so that he had forward knowledge and was able to present his own opinions before you went ahead and spent the money. This kind of transparency is essential when you are in conflict with somebody who may later on dispute the value of the work which was carried out. Fortunately you have had more than one opinion from independent garages and this will be very helpful to you. So in order to recover your money, you have prepared a letter but which is rather open-ended because it simply says that you would like to have a reply within 14 days or else you may go and see a solicitor. Given that you have been rebuffed quite peremptorily by the seller of the vehicle, I don't think that this is going to make very much impression. You need to take control of this and assert yourself. I notice that you say that you are too exhausted to look around for a replacement vehicle. Do you have the stamina to conduct a small claim against this dealer? It's very easy but it will require some tenacity and there won't be a quick solution. I can expect to go on for six months or so before you get a result unless the dealer decides to put their hands up. I would avoid going to a solicitor if I were you because first of all you incur expenses which you will not get back from the dealer. Also the solicitor will start off by sending letters which will simply delay things further and of course will incur further costs for you. You haven't told us the name of the dealer – even though you have been asked by another member of the site team. He also haven't told us anything about the car – the make, model, year, mileage and price. I think we will have to modify your letter based on whether you think that you would be prepared to take your own small claim action. If you do take a small claim action then your financial outlay will be fairly minimal and everything you do outlay will be recoverable – assuming that you win. On the basis of what you say, I would guess that your chances of success are much better than 90%. However, there is the issue that the dealer may try to challenge the value of the work you have had carried out because you didn't give him any advance notice. We will have to deal with this.  
    • So Guys, After sending the last letter as everyone else  here I got a reply from Moriartylaw with a statement that ADCB instructed them to act on their behalf and a copy of all my credit card bank statements. Not sure what to do now. They want me to respond and supply them with a list of asset and liabilities.    please the attachment of the letter. moriartylaw.jpeg.pdf
    • Okay, let me start again. In terms of planning, is it not enough to say they don't have it since it's not shown on the council site? If not, if I ring Stockport planning would they put in writing that there's no planning?   I could contact the land registry to find out who the land owner is. If I contact them directly maybe they'll tell me if they have a contract in place. If they ignore my request too then should I be doing other things to find this out?
    • I'm trying to work through this step-by-step as I read the story again. There was a dispute over a will in respect of your grandfather's house but the dispute was eventually abandoned and it seems that the house was apportioned to your mother and her brother who presumably were the only two children. The will was unsigned and so we could say that the house passed to the two of them under the rules of intestacy. You then decided to buy the house for £50,000 and presumably the money you paid was divided between your mother and your uncle – you are the owners of the house. This was in 1999. We talking about 30 years ago here and so in respect of most legal questions I would have thought that some limitation period applied. (However the issue of the trust has been raised – and this wouldn't be affected by limitation) However, presumably the house was bought at a proper value given the market at the time and any work that it needed doing. Presumably the house was properly conveyed. Although a lot of things have passed – including home improvements, tenancies et cetera, from the store you have told us, neither your parents nor your uncle have been involved in this at all. Now you have received a letter from your parents saying that the house is really theirs and that you have simply been holding it on trust for them and they now want it back. Is this a reasonable summary of what has happened?   Although you have written a fair bit about bills, tenancies, and that you have lived in your parents home for some of this 30 years, I'm not sure what relevance that has to the problem. I have to say that your explanation is very unclear. A bit rambling in fact. If you think that part of the story is relevant then maybe you'd like to express it all a little more clearly and say in what way you think it is relevant to the problem. You are much more familiar with the story then I am but I don't see that those factors are terribly important on the brief understanding that I have. if if any money is owed to your parents because of you having lived with them et cetera then it seems to me that that is a separate matter and has nothing to do with your ownership of the property. You say that you have received a letter from solicitors claiming first of all that there is a constructive trust or that you might be subject to a proprietary estoppel. In terms of the estoppel, that doctrine is only available in very particular circumstances and could not be used to attack you in any event. Estoppel, whether it is proprietary or promissory can only be used as a defence. So the question of estoppel in this situation is completely irrelevant, in my view, although I don't see any basis for one in any event. So what remains is the possibility of a constructive trust. It seems to me to be highly unlikely that there is such a trust and I think that the first question needs to be asked is on what basis they consider that there is a constructive trust. Secondly, of course, even if there was a constructive trust, on the basis of what you have told us, it wouldn't only be your mother who was the beneficiary, it would also be your uncle. Furthermore, if you were a constructive trustee then at the very least you would be entitled to recover all of the expenses that you had laid out over 30 years – including the cost of the property plus interest – less any financial benefit that you had accrued from renting it out and so forth. I'm not sure how good this analysis is. This is well out of my experience – but I would suggest that you consider it and see whether any of it rings true. I would also start making a very detailed account of all the money which you have spent over the years on the property and also a detailed account of all the benefits you have accrued from it. I would supply this to their solicitor that if you end up having to instruct your own lawyer then I'm sure that you may be asked for this if there is any suspicion that a constructive trust may exist. Frankly it sounds like a load of rubbish to me that we will be very interested if you will keep us up to date. So there you have it. No particular answers. Just a few unsupported and unqualified opinions    
    • Hello and welcome to CAG.   I agree with dx, hiring a lawyer is unlikely to help as most of them don't understand fare matters, so you end up paying for their learning curve.   Your idea about involving your GP is a good one, it sounds as if you need their input with how you're feeling. And if they would write a supporting letter that could help too. Hopefully your medical information will be through in time.   HB
  • Our picks

Gay_guy1986

Jobseekers diary

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2567 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Morning Everyone!

 

This morning I sign on at 10.45am however I filled in my Jobseekers dairy and since I signed on last fortnight I have applyed for 14 Jobs and I written them down in my dairy, will that be ok? or could Jobcentre send my Jobseekers to a decision Maker?

 

I only heard back from 1 by email as I apply by jobs by email (sending my cv attached) and It states in the email that I have been Unsuccessful, I am trying to get a job but not a lot of Jobs in the last past week.

 

Any advice would be great thank you. :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Morning Everyone!

 

 

 

This morning I sign on at 10.45am however I filled in my Jobseekers dairy and since I signed on last fortnight I have applyed for 14 Jobs and I written them down in my dairy, will that be ok? or could Jobcentre send my Jobseekers to a decision Maker?

 

 

 

I only heard back from 1 by email as I apply by jobs by email (sending my cv attached) and It states in the email that I have been Unsuccessful, I am trying to get a job but not a lot of Jobs in the last past week.

 

 

 

Any advice would be great thank you. smile.gif

 

 

 

Hi that it's tons . They only look for about 7-8 things in the book you will not have a prob !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably just lulling you into a false sense of security:biggrin:

 

Only joking - nice to hear something positive for a change.


RMW

"If you want my parking space, please take my disability" Common car park sign in France.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as you are meeting the minimum requirements as per you job seekers agreement then there wouldn't be a problem but if you are given any vacancies to apply for then make sure you do :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Flumps1976,

 

Oh yeah I deffo going to apply for the jobs what they give me as I don't want my jsa sanctioned but at the moment I have not had any jobs from them yet, Just my advicer at the work programme which I applyed for them!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you attend work programme then you are only supposed to see the signing team at the JCP, all advisory support is to be provided by which ever provider you have been allocated to.

You adviser at Work Programme will set up an action plan with you which replaces the Job Seekers Agreement and that is what you are supposed to follow, the signing team are there to check that you are meeting at least the minimum requirements and weekly activities, but they can refer to an adviser if there any doubts that arise and the work programme will refer to dma if they have any doubts over your job seeking activities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since a few months ago Jobcentre is now checking everyone JSA Dairy even though people still getting help from the work programme, when I signed on this morning a notice was on the desk stating this:

 

Warning to people who are on the work programme, when you attend for your signing on day please make sure you bring your dairy with you to your appointments and to show proof of what you done to activity seeking work, if you fail to provide this your benefits will be suspended!

 

Looks like the goverment is really getting tough now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like they are wanting some excuse to sanction

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not heard that before. When I was signing on and was on the work programme, I was just asked if there were any changes (starting work, etc) that would affect my JSA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since the the new sanction regime started on 22nd October the emphasis has been put back to the customer to show evidence of their jobsearch at every adviser appointment or signing intervention. This is ready for the intoduction of Universal Job Match on the 19th November.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Out of interest if there were no jobs to be 'universally matched' to then what would happen?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Universal jobmatch isn't just about matching to jobs, it will log every time you log on to the account to help prove that you are actively seeking as per te Job Seekers Agreement, and it will also show what jobs have been applied for via the account, so if a vacancy is matched and not applied for it will show up immediately!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow that sounds like its going to be a great tool for sanctions, but wait isnt the jobs already listed a bit erm, out of date, inaccurate or just not suitable? Wonder how the system is going to work , waiting tables listed on job advert turns out to be a strip joint for example?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wow that sounds like its going to be a great tool for sanctions, but wait isnt the jobs already listed a bit erm, out of date, inaccurate or just not suitable? Wonder how the system is going to work , waiting tables listed on job advert turns out to be a strip joint for example?

 

If anyone gets matched with a job at a strip joint, I urge them to do something I would not normally recommend: contact the Daily Mail.


PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING. EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

The idea that all politicians lie is music to the ears of the most egregious liars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nice answer antone...but do you honestly think that daily mail readers will much care? they are all for getting the 'scrounging ****' into any work that is available, even if it is odious or unsuitable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a Daily Mail reader (only because I can red arrow the plonkers who get in a tiz about things) I have even applied for a job on that paper.

 

I find having to do things under the threat of sanctions very draconian and very counter productive.

 

As I posted on a couple of threads myself and a friend sat and came up with a string of jobs to apply for which we would never be shortlisted for, let alone have the experience of.

 

Currently on the Reed jobsite there are jobs advertising £22-50,000 a year being Mystery Shoppers or making money from Facebook/other online media. When you click on that it takes you to another website where it wants your bank details - a big no-no for most people, and those that do enter them here may find that they have money taken - nothing so far has been reported but the Jobcentre locally sent out a warning about entering bank details on job applications.

 

Fair enough to make sure people are applying for 'real' vacancies with a 'real' chance of employment but NOT to 'make them suffer for the money' which seems to be the newer way of looking at benefits - forgetting the origin of the word - from Latin bene - meaning for the good of everyone.

 

Benefits now has become a battleground for the moral minority and the moralistically motivated majority who think they can 'change the world to their way of thinking'.

 

Well, for the moralistically motivated majority one day you will be in need and who will then listen to you? The Big Society is not working on the level Cameron and his mates wanted, and come the next General Election the 'middle classes' will react accordingly, the only things I can find in Cameron's favour is that he is beginning to cut foreign aid to countries who are clearly sorting themselves out, and he does not seem to be a war-mongerer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the only thing I can find in camerons favour, is the fact that i hope he gets a hiding to nothing at the next GE....however, whoever, or whatever we replace these 'born to rule' fools with I cannot see anything changing for the better...the labour party now seems to be a centre to slight left leaning of the Conservative party, whilst the libdems who have sold this nation down the river by siding with the Cons will never be trusted again, after persuading the young vote by promising 'no tuition fee rise' then going back on that has left them unelectable for generations...so the only thing we are left with to put our cross against are the smaller parties such as UKIP or Greens..neither of which fill me with any confidence..the future looks bleaker by the day!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...