Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Honestly you are all amazing on this site, thank you so much for your help and time. ill keep an eye out and only return when i receive a claim letter for sure also, i updated my address with amex and tsb before i even missed payments. the initial address was my family home but i dont reside there. to avoid a bombardment of letters there i have now updated my address, will they send all threats etc to the new address? Or old address?   do you reccomend i send both tsb and amex my update in address via a letter?
    • Your point 4 deals with that and puts them to strict proof .....but realistically they are not in a position to state that within their particulars they were not the creditor at the time of default but naturally assume the OC would have...so always worth challenging and if you get a DJ who knows his onions on the day may ask for further evidence from the OC internal accounts system. 
    • I see, shame, I think if a claim is 'someone was served' then proof of that should be mandatory. Appreciate your input into the WS whenever you get chance, thanks in advance
    • Paper trail off the original creditor often confirms the default and issue of a notice...not having or being able to disclose the actual copy or being able to produce a copy less so. Creditors are not compelled to keep copies of the actual default notice so you will in most cases get a reconstituted version but must contain accurate figures/dates/format.     .    
    • Including Default Notice Andy? Ok, I think this is the best I can do.. it all makes sense with references to their WS. They have included exhibits that dates don't match the WS about them, small but still.. if you're going to reference letters giving dates, then the exhibits should be correct, no? I know I redacted them too much, but one of the dates differs to the WS by a few months. IN THE ******** County Court Claim No. [***] BETWEEN: LC Asset 2 S.A.R.L CLAIMANT AND [***] DEFENDANT ************ _________________________ ________ WITNESS STATEMENT OF [***] _________________________ ________ I, [***], being the Defendant in this case will state as follows; I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in this claim. 1. I understand that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much-reduced cost to the amount claimed and which the original creditors have already written off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income as confirmed in the claimant’s witness statement exhibit by way of the Deed of Assignment. As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights. This means that when an assignee purchases debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information). The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party. 2. The Claim relates to an alleged Credit Card agreement between the Defendant and Bank of Scotland plc. Save insofar of any admittance it is accepted that the Defendant has had contractual agreements with Bank of Scotland plc in the past, the Defendant is unaware as to what alleged debt the Claimant refers. 3. The Defendant requested a copy of the CCA on the 24/12/2022 along with the standard fee of £1.00 postal order, to which the defendant received a reply from the Claimant dated 06/02/2023. To this date, the Claimant has failed to disclose a valid agreement and proof as per their claim that this is enforceable, that Default Notice and Notice of Assignment were sent to and received by the Defendant, on which their claim relies. The Claimant is put to strict proof to verify and confirm that the exhibit *** is a true copy of the agreement and are the true Terms and Conditions as issued at the time of inception of the online application and execution of the agreement. 4. Point 3 is noted. The Claimant pleads that a default notice has been served upon the defendant as evidenced by Exhibit [***]. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 5. Point 6 is noted and disputed. The Defendant cannot recall ever having received the notice of assignment as evidenced in the exhibit marked ***. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 6. Point 11 is noted and disputed. See 3. 7. Point 12 is noted, the Defendant doesn’t recall receiving contact where documentation is provided as per the Claimants obligations under CCA. In addition, the Claimant pleads letters were sent on dates given, yet those are not the letters evidenced in their exhibits *** 8. Point 13 is noted and denied. Claimant is put to strict proof to prove allegations. 9. The Claimant did not provide a true copy of the CCA in response to the Defendants request of 24/12/2022. The Claimant further claims that the documents are sufficient to pursue a Judgement and are therefore copies of original documents in their possession. Conclusion 10. Without the Claimant providing a valid true copy of the executed Credit agreement that complies with the CCA, the Claimant has no grounds on which to enforce this alleged debt. 11. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. On receipt of this claim I could not recall the precise details of the agreement or any debt and sought clarity from the claimant by way of a Section 78 request. The Claimant failed to comply. I can only assume as this was due to the Claimant not having any enforceable documentation and issuing a claim in hope of an undefended default judgment.   Statement of Truth I, ********, the Defendant, believe the facts stated within this Witness Statement to be true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in it’s truth. Signed: _________________________ _______ Dated: _____________________
  • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3640 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

@ Farbramble: If you do give the DWP access, when you go into the Jobcentre, they will ask you for your email to find you on the site, they can also use your name, phone number and a few other various ways.

But as I said, if you do not give them access, there is no way to view your account.

 

@ stikky62: You are mistaken. The recommended jobs you are seeing are jobs recommend to you from the skills you provided when you first created the account. This can be found under 'Profile' and scroll down to the bottom.

These jobs are not exact matches to you and are not there for you to definitely apply for them. It is just suggested jobs you may be interested in. Also key words from your CV may also bring up some jobs.

 

I'll give you an example, if someone is going for an entry level position, say minimum wage and they are looking for jobs to do with admin or ICT. Now in the recommended jobs, there might be a job for a admin manager, where the wage maybe 30 to 35k a year. Now clearly that person is not qualified to do that job, so will not be expected to apply for it.

But if there is a job there that you can apply for, then why not apply for it.

 

Edit: Please remember this site is still new, it's going to have problems, but it will get better in time.

Edited by jbaker2009
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Strangely enough it Admin I'm looking for.

 

You say we're not expected to apply for jobs we're not qualified for, that's not strictly true. Most jobs advertised ask for some form of qualification/experience and as I was once told by a DWP advisor to 'think outside the box' and stop looking just at admin I assumed I was now to take no notice of required qualifications and experience, and they were going to do the same.

 

f.y.i I'm applying for jobs I want/can apply for and quite a lot of others I have no interest in whatsoever (half hearted applications but its the pressures of 'playing the game' - I've got targets to hit :wink: )

Link to post
Share on other sites

The point I was trying to make with the example was, if a person has never had experience as a manager, has never really worked before and has basic IT skills the chances of them getting a job that is at 35k a year is very unlikely, so an advisor is not going to say, why didn't you apply for this job? It will be clear from talking to the person and seeing their CV that they are very unlikely to get that job.

 

Am not saying do not apply for jobs that ask for experience or qualifications that you do not have, but just think logically about your chances of getting a specific job.

 

Edit: Any job that you can do, you should be applying for.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The fear is claimants will be sanctioned for not applying to any and all jobs whether they're appropriate or not or even realistic. Do you have any comment? Also, what do you know of this mandatory 35 hours a week jobsearch nonsense we keep hearing of please?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Each benefit is different and has different requirements you need to meet. My experience is with Jobseeker's Allowance (JSA) and when you make a claim you enter an agreement and within that agreement will be what you need to do to fulfil what is expected of you. As long as you do what is needed, you will be fine.

 

My experience is on UJ and helping people use it, this mandatory 35hours a week, is not what I deal with but I will try to get clarification on the subject and reply here tomorrow.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to know how they are going to make this mandatory after reading this Privacy policy on the site:

 

This Privacy Policy sets out how online information will be collected and used on and by this website.

 

By registering or by using this site, you accept, how the personal information provided by you will be collected, used and transferred. Please read this policy carefully as it affects your rights and responsibilities under the law. If you disagree with the way we collect and process personal information collected on the Site, please do not use it.

 

If I don't agree then I won't use the site, Simples as the meerkat would say.

 

George

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to know how they are going to make this mandatory after reading this Privacy policy on the site:

 

This Privacy Policy sets out how online information will be collected and used on and by this website.

 

By registering or by using this site, you accept, how the personal information provided by you will be collected, used and transferred. Please read this policy carefully as it affects your rights and responsibilities under the law. If you disagree with the way we collect and process personal information collected on the Site, please do not use it.

 

If I don't agree then I won't use the site, Simples as the meerkat would say.

 

George

 

I am replying from my phone here so excuse anything that looks odd.

 

I made a new thread about Universal Jobmatch an a guy, I think, asked the same question about the site becoming mandatory, this is the reply I gave him...

 

"As of right now, UJ is not mandatory, and it will not becoming mandatory for a long time and might never become mandatory, when I was looking at the latest updates today, no mention of mandatory registration was mentioned. When I go in tomorrow I will find out for any exact dates for you and will post a reply as soon as I know."

 

I hope this helps you...

 

What is it about the policy that you disagree with exactly?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you...

 

I hope they do to, I spent all day today in the JCP helping staff and customers with UJ. So hopefully they ask me anything they don't feel like asking advisers in the JC.

 

I use the site myself testing for problems and such yet I can use the site no problem, yes bugs are there but nothing so bad they cannot use the site, and there is a lot misconceptions about the site and I will able to answer them here.

 

John

Can you please tell me why there's no way there to write a cover letter and why when you mention it to the e-mail team they don't care? THe wp etc always want a cover letter and (more importantly) so do the employers

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

I made a new thread about Universal Jobmatch an a guy, I think, asked the same question about the site becoming mandatory, this is the reply I gave him...

 

"As of right now, UJ is not mandatory, and it will not becoming mandatory for a long time and might never become mandatory, when I was looking at the latest updates today, no mention of mandatory registration was mentioned. When I go in tomorrow I will find out for any exact dates for you and will post a reply as soon as I know."

 

That source sounds familiar. I might be mistaken, but this info was drafted quite some time ago. I'm sure that IDS was talking lately of making the site compulsory.

Link to post
Share on other sites

if anyone has their ID stolen as a result of UJM then IDS should be held personally responsible and face criminal charges!

 

Ever since this loophole was discovered, (the potential to harvest personal info), the DWP have only issued the usual soundbites. Yet after the DWP's statement on security, CH4 news were still able to create an alias and sign up as an employer.

 

Anyway, in light of this, I'm thinking of redacting all key info on my CV. But then again, will probably get sanctioned on the basis of hindering the jobmatch process.

Link to post
Share on other sites

if anyone has their ID stolen as a result of UJM then IDS should be held personally responsible and face criminal charges!

 

 

Won't ever happen, the job seeker would be accused of being irresponsible with his/her information, the same tactics the banks try when someone clones a credit card.

 

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

If the Job center can remotely monitor me via my jobs match profile, why do i have to make a 40 mile round trip to meet with my advisor?

 

FYI i have not signed anything allowing them to see my personal data but it is clear that when i go in tomorrow i will be expected to sign. im just curios behind their logic

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Job center can remotely monitor me via my jobs match profile, why do i have to make a 40 mile round trip to meet with my advisor?

 

FYI i have not signed anything allowing them to see my personal data but it is clear that when i go in tomorrow i will be expected to sign. im just curios behind their logic

 

Hello there.

 

I've moved your query to an existing thread about UJ, rather than have another thread about it.

 

My best, HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets clarify the talk about mandatory UJ registration. As of right now, registration is not mandatory and as of right now, there is no talk of UJ becoming mandatory. If UJ was to become mandatory it will not be for a long time, long time being my interpretation of a long time, and you will be well informed before it does.

 

I can't speak on behalf of all the different types of benefit, but as job seekers claiming JSA, you should be doing everything in your power to find work, UJ is a good viable option to find work, so you would have to give a good reason to why you would not use the site.

 

You don't have to give us permission, but why would'nt you? The information on the site is information the JCP already has about you, it's not like the JCP is going to learn anything new from your account.

 

I would like to ask use a question... Why would you not want to sign up and use the site?

 

It's basically the same as other job search sites. You sign up, upload your CV, then apply for jobs. The site is managed by Monster Worldwide Ltd and am sure you have heard of Monster.

 

Just this is designed to help use, as job seekers, keep track of the jobs you have applied for and one day remove the use of the ES4 form because you can do it online.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Chester6:

 

Hmmm ill try to answer this for you...

 

It's clear you cannot attach a cover letter if you apply via the 'Apply' button on the site, but if an employer adds that 'Apply' button to their vacancy then it would suggest to me that they do not need nor want a cover letter.

 

Now if an employer has a job on the site, but there is no 'Apply' button, and asks you to send your CV via a direct email, then that could suggest that the employer would like a cover letter.

 

Does this help?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Job center can remotely monitor me via my jobs match profile, why do i have to make a 40 mile round trip to meet with my advisor?

 

FYI i have not signed anything allowing them to see my personal data but it is clear that when i go in tomorrow i will be expected to sign. im just curios behind their logic

 

Why do you think the Jobcentre can remotely monitor you? When they cannot.

 

"personal data"? what do you think personal data is? And what do you think they can actually see?

 

Am curious.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do you think the Jobcentre can remotely monitor you? When they cannot.

 

"personal data"? what do you think personal data is? And what do you think they can actually see?

 

Am curious.

 

Hello again. I don't have experience of this system, but clearly it's bothering people and this is understandable. Not all of us have a deep understanding of IT, such as myself. :)

 

Any reassurance you can give would be really appreciated.

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The system's open to fraud as there aren't checks on whether supposed employers are genuine. Such people can be harvesting details with a view to implementing identity fraud. Also the whole site seems to be an excuse for sanctioning people. If they turn down any job at all they can be sanctioned for it and then have to go months with no money till their reconsideration comes through and then wait many further months till their appeal, with which they will be denied any assistance as funding's being withdrawn for legal aid. The whole point of the site is to set claimants up to fail. If it weren't, job application would be automatic, wouldn't it? Claimants wouldn't be left any choice at all, would they? The system would simply apply for suitable jobs on their behalf and they'd be expected to take up any reasonable offers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello again. I don't have experience of this system, but clearly it's bothering people and this is understandable. Not all of us have a deep understanding of IT, such as myself. :)

 

Any reassurance you can give would be really appreciated.

 

Hi again HB.

 

I'll make it very clear, to register on UJ, you will need to provide...

1. Your first name

2. Your surname

3. Your city/town

4. Your region

5. Your postcode

6. Your email address

7. And a skill you think you have

 

Now from that list, you tell me, what part of it does the Jobcentre not have already?

 

Edit: Some people do not have emails, don't use that as an answer if you don't have an email.

Edited by jbaker2009
Link to post
Share on other sites

The system's open to fraud as there aren't checks on whether supposed employers are genuine. Such people can be harvesting details with a view to implementing identity fraud. Also the whole site seems to be an excuse for sanctioning people. If they turn down any job at all they can be sanctioned for it and then have to go months with no money till their reconsideration comes through and then wait many further months till their appeal, with which they will be denied any assistance as funding's being withdrawn for legal aid. The whole point of the site is to set claimants up to fail. If it weren't, job application would be automatic, wouldn't it? Claimants wouldn't be left any choice at all, would they? The system would simply apply for suitable jobs on their behalf and they'd be expected to take up any reasonable offers.

 

There is checks to see whether employers are real, the fake employers that got through managed to get past the checks, yes, it shouldn't of happened but it did. It. Will. Get. Better. Can anyone remember when Monster was first launched? Fish4jobs? Indeed? They well could have had the same issues, we just didn't hear about it, but I could be wrong.

 

You are wrong. You will not be sanctioned for not applying for a job that you cannot do. You will be sanctioned for not applying for a job that you CAN do. If you can do a job, then do it, sounds pretty simple to me. Where are you getting your information from?

 

Are you just trying to be annoying? There is many reasons why automatic job application is not setup, do you really want me to state some for you or can you work it out for yourself?

Link to post
Share on other sites

... Are you just trying to be annoying? There is many reasons why automatic job application is not setup, do you really want me to state some for you or can you work it out for yourself?

 

Ahem. I would rather hope that patience, understanding and compassion were three key elements necessary in a customer orientated position such as those of an adviser in JC+ and certainly for anyone involved with the training of others.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...