Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Which would require a hearing....so the fee would be £255.00
    • When providing a copy of an executed agreement in response to a request under section 78(1) of the Act:   a.     must a creditor provide a photocopy (or other form of complete copy) of the original agreement that was signed by the debtor or at least provide a copy which is derived directly from the original agreement or complete copy thereof? or b.     can a creditor provide a document which is a reconstitution of the original agreement which may be from sources other than the actual signed agreement itself?   It was held that a creditor can satisfy its duty under section 78 by providing a reconstituted version of the executed agreement which may be from sources other than the actual signed agreement itself.   The judge accepted that as a matter of law, section 78 does not itself require any particular explanation as to how the copy was made. However, as a matter of good practice and so as not to mislead the debtor, it is desirable that the creditor should explain that it is providing a reconstituted as opposed to a physical copy of the executed agreement. This will also explain why the copy might otherwise look a little odd. The creditor can also explain in the letter that this procedure is satisfactory under the Act. The judge also provided that the following information needs to be included in the reconstituted copy agreement (assuming of course that it was present in the original):   1.     Heading: Credit Agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 2.     Name and address of the debtor 3.     Name and address of the creditor 4.     Cancellation clause applicable to the executed agreement.   All of the above may be provided on a sheet which is separate from the full statement of terms and conditions which also forms part of the reconstituted agreement. The creditor may, however, decide to reconstitute the agreement in a different way so that, for example, the information above is populated electronically onto the same sheet as that which sets out the terms and conditions, or some of them. The judge stated that he did not intend to prescribe the precise form of the reconstituted agreement. The key point is what information it should contain, subject to the point that its format should not be such as to mislead the debtor as to what he agreed to.   The judge also considered whether a statement like the one appearing in the reconstructed application form in Carey referring to the agreement to the terms and conditions "attached" needs to be included in the reconstituted copy. Alternatively if the application form had said "I agree to the terms overleaf", should that statement be included. The judge held that this aspect of the form is not necessary for the purpose of the section 78 copy, although there is nothing to stop a bank from putting it in or indeed from furnishing a copy of the type of application form or signature page that the debtor would have signed, as some banks have done. The statement referring to terms and conditions is not itself prescribed information and the supply of the terms and conditions which were applicable at the time will tell the debtor what he needs to know in terms of the content of what he signed up to, including the presence (or otherwise) of the prescribed terms.   In practical terms what this is likely to mean is that if the creditor chooses to use as the section 78 copy the section 63 copy, which would have been provided to that particular debtor at the time following execution of the agreement, this will be sufficient provided that the information referred to above is supplied. This exercise is not a mere formality. The creditor will need to check carefully that the details of the debtor at the time are correct and that those are the particular terms (including prescribed terms) that he/she agreed to. This is to ensure that it is an honest and accurate copy.   Must a creditor provide a document which would comply (if signed) with the requirements of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (Regulations) as to form, as at the date the agreement was made in order to comply with section 78?   A creditor need not, in complying with section 78, provide a document which would comply (if signed) with the requirements of the Regulations as to form, as at the date the agreement was made.   Must the copy provided under section 78 include the debtor's name and address as at the date when the agreement was made, and if so in what form? The section 78 copy must contain the name and address of the debtor as it was at the time of the execution of the agreement. But the creditor can provide the name and address from whatever source it has of those details. It does not have to take them from the executed agreement itself.     If an agreement has been varied by the creditor under a unilateral power of variation, is a copy of the executed agreement as varied, a sufficient copy for the purposes of section 78(1), or must the creditor provide a copy of the original agreement as well?   If an agreement has been varied by the creditor under a unilateral power of variation, the creditor must still provide a copy of the original agreement, as well as the varied terms.     As your agreement is post April 2007  Section 61(1)(a) and 127(3)   Consumer Credit Act 1974 would not apply.   Andy
    • well start a new thread for the court claim.   as for this one i'd await the letter of claim  
    • Useful information...   And....   https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part55
    • nice and ofcourse totally unlawful.   £349.50 is the usual sum RLP try and fleece out of people under some silly civil threats none of goes to the store it all goes in RLP's pocket for their next staff holiday paid for by mugs that fall for their twaddle ignore!!
  • Our picks

David-B

Sanction for Leaving Work Voluntarily

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2517 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

Hello Forums!

 

I just found out today that I have been sanctioned for 4 months due to leaving my old work voluntarily. I know what many of you may think about me (ungrateful...........) but I was working only 14 hours and was racking up debt such as rent etc.

 

I started a job via the future jobs fund program (2010), complete waste of time personally but that's another thread all together! I was hired for a 25 hr/week for 6 months. During my future jobs fund placement I was told my contract will be extended after the 6 months period. After the 6 months placement completed I was offered a contract for 14 hours. At this point I knew 14 hours was not enough to cover my basic bills such as rent, council tax and power & gas. So I tried making a new claim for JSA over the telephone and was told I would be sanctioned 100% as I was refusing employment being offered to me. OK, fair enough I thought and accepted the 14 hour contract. After a year and half of racking up debt such as rent etc as well as getting no help with housing or council tax benefit, I just gave up! So I quit my job, took a step back in life and moved back in with mum a few months. I was signing on for two months without further information request from myself or my ex employer. I still have a great out of work relationship with my old line manager who confirmed nothing was ever received from JCP.

 

Then today....news of the sanction was given to me while attending to sign!

 

I have not had my letter yet explaining exactly why but should JCP not have investigated this further? Asked for proof of debt, spoke with old employer etc... The only time I got to explain myself was on the back of the claim form where I only put abbreviated details. Did they expect me to keep living in the red? I know I mentioned I recently moved backed in with mum but that was a last resort.

 

My problem is not so much with the sanction itself TBH. Its how it was handled. I know I have did wrong, I did give up a paying job, i was expecting it, but I would have preferred them taking into consideration my financial problems if I kept working as well as the length of time I continued to work at 14 hours. Its not as if I never looked for work or kept asking when my hours would go up.

 

Any help and experiences would be very helpful. This is my first sanction:(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you complete for ES84JP when you first made your claim?

That form is your opportuniy to give yor reasons as to why you left you previous employment and if the DM has sufficent information on that form they do not need to request additional information and if it is a leaving voluntarily case they won't contact yor previous employer either.

The referral is made regardless of if you completed the ES84JP or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Many thanks for your response. Not sure the form number but I was asked to fill something in about why I left work. Also I can't seem to find any information online to things they take into consideration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry forgot to add. When I spoke to job seekers direct today they told me they always contact employers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this is an older version of the form but the current version is fairly simila.

Apologies that it is not the current version but it's the forst one I've found and don't wabt to spend my home time searching ifgwim?

 

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/114168/response/278058/attach/2/ES84JP%201209.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah that looks like it!

 

I entered which I thought were 3 suitable reasons. One of the reasons I put my was a risk to my health and safety, and was quite a serious allegation so was under the impression my ex employer would be given the right to respond to that.

 

Edit: I brought the health & safety issue up with employer before but went on deaf ears.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have any new additional information trhen you can ask for the decision to be reconsidered if there is no further information then you will need to consider requesting an appeal against the decision.

You can request a claim for hardship but you may not be paid for the first 14 days of the sanction and the guidance for hardship has changed where you have to demonstarate that you will be in hardship without payments, by supplying bank statements and proof of any other income you may have.

If you live at home you may not be eligible to receive hardship unless yu are responsible for any of the household utility bills.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you again for taking the time to respond.

 

I think I will be asking for the decisions to be reconsidered. I spent last night typing up all the information, providing dates etc.

 

I have been trying to find out the main reason for the decision as it was made a few days ago and no letter has been received but no one seems to know who processed the decision.

 

I call JCdirect and he told me that he would send an email over to the central decision maker office and get a call back. I got a call back this morning who told me it was the local job centre themselves that enforced the sanction and made the decision.

 

I called my local JC who told me that it was not themselves, so I called JCdirect back who told me it was the central office. Awaiting a call back from the central office again. Also everyone I speak to within the JC seems to have different information on sanctions and applying for hardship. Don't they train staff anymore?

 

No one can tell me when the letter was sent out, which office it was sent out from, when I will receive it or who made the decision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The referral is made by the JCP. The decision is made by the DMA (Decision Making and Appeals) team. The decision is forwarded to the processing team to input on to the payments system.

If you request a reconsideration that is passed to the JCP who then collate all the necessat information and paperwork then forward it to the DMA team who will consider if there is any new additional information to reconsider. The decision will either remain unchanged, be wholly revoked, be partially revoked or worse case scenario increased.

 

DMA do not speak to customers directly as the decision must be based purely on information provided, tere is no human element or compassion within this process sorry so you won' receive a call back from DMA.

 

Hardship is becoming much harder to apply for.

If you are in a vunerable group (pregnant proof of EDD required, young children proof of children by b/certs and proof of child benefit and child tax credits, or long term health condition backed up by a fit note) you may be eligible from day 1 but if not in a vunerable group then you may not be enitltled for the first 14 days.

You also have provide proof of all bank accounts that you have to show that you have no other income or savings and will be asked further questions to determine if there is any entitlement.

 

The letter is went out via the JSAPs syste, unless the letter was inhibited which does happen automatically and they can view the date the sanction was input on various screen on the JSAPs system. (dialogue 513 shows the sanction type and period and dialogue 570 show the date that any letters were sent out or not). The letters are sent out centrally then sent out via Royal Mail and I can't remembver where the centralised system is based sorry.

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...