Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • OK.  So you lent your car to a friend in 2019 and he racked up three parking tickets that he tells you he didn't know anything about(!).  You were the registered keeper (RK) at the time at your family address, but you got chucked out and could not change your RK address with DVLA because you were homeless.  You knew nothing about the parking tickets and enforcement action until you got a bailiffs' letter passed on to you.  You made an Out of Time (OOT) application in respect of one PCN but Birmingham CC objected to it and the traffic court rejected your application.  A solicitor helped you make OOTs in respect of the other two PCNs but you don't yet know the outcome of those two applications.   Is that the situation you are in?   dx100uk thinks you can resubmit the application saying your friend was the driver.  I don't think saying that will help as the driver is irrelevant.  It's the owner who is liable to pay the charge and that is the RK (unless the RK is a car hire firm).  I assume you are not a car hire firm so you are stuck with the liability, not the driver.   Whether you actually can resubmit an OOT once one has been rejected I do not know, but why not try.  What did the solicitor put on the applications they helped you with?  Did you not ask their advice about the rejected application while you were with them?  I think you would have to say something to the effect that you never received any paperwork in relation to the PCNs because you had been chucked out of your home and because you were homeless you did not update your address at DVLA.  That is the truth isn't it?  You don't want to lie on the application.   To me that's a good reason for you not doing anything about the PCNs, but I suspect that Birmingham CC will object again and that the traffic court will reject again.  And, as I said above, I don't even know if you can submit a second OOT application in respect of a PCN if the first has been rejected.   So it looks to me like you might be a bit stuck.   Unless dx100uk, or spaceman61, or another poster with expertise in local authority PCNs comes along I'm not sure what you do.   If you get no more helpful suggestions here you could try on National Consumer Service.  If you do go there, do not register with a hotmail address.  You will also need to provide them with a timeline of everything for all the documents you actually have, and you will need all the facts and dates etc at your fingertips.  And make sure they are accurate.   http://forums.National Consumer Service.com/index.php?showforum=30   And get your friend to contribute to paying off the PCNs.  Do you believe he really knew nothing about them?
    • To enjoy the protection offered by s.75 CCA 1974 for a credit card payment, you must pay over £100 and under £30,000 for the goods or service (even if part payment for a larger total amount).
    • Hi Charlie and welcome to CAG   As an Executor, you have a duty to insure the property and tell the currect insurer of the passing of the deceased.   Most insurers will refuse normal contents cover on a house left unoccupied beyond 60 days. So, unoccupied, the home will not be insured against break-in damage, theft, flood, accidental damage, etc.   You may be able to obtain FLEE insurance covering only Fire, Lightening, Explosion and Earthquake. It may cost more than usual contents cover  because the home is unoccupied, even though the level/amount of cover is less than for an occupied home.   As said here already, an Executor would be wise (or indeed have a duty) to remove valuables from the home if you have somewhere safer to store them pending Probate, distribution, sale, etc.   I hope if you can explain the insurance risks to YB and assure him that you are not taking items just for your own benefit, he may see sense.   Please keep us updated ............
    • yours is not the next move   dx  
  • Our picks

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2864 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

I was targeted by DWP staff after the Christmas holiday period for not having made enough effort over this period to look for work.

1. HR departments would have been on holiday so would not have been able to respond to my enquiries even if there were any jobs being advertised.

2. There were no jobs advertised in this period.

3. I did apply after the main Christmas week for jobs abroad as they were the only ones advertised.

4. My Personal advisor (DWP) queried my applying overseas. I explained I needed to fulfil the Jobseekers agreement. She then took a long time to scrutinise my logbook/ diary, went to a colleague to discuss my logbook, returned & claimed I had not made enough effort to look for work.

5. This was compounded by fact that I was not required to sign on 4 weeks over Xmas & New Year so could not be advised there might be a problem

6. To date the Decision makers have had my case for over TWO weeks and have not yet made a decision nor asked for any further information.

7. If they do find against me I will of course appeal but this should never have gone to decisions makers in the first place.

8. It is the fault of my Personal advisor, she did not have to refer this given the time of year and I do believe it is malicious.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I was targeted by DWP staff after the Christmas holiday period for not having made enough effort over this period to look for work.

1. HR departments would have been on holiday so would not have been able to respond to my enquiries even if there were any jobs being advertised.

2. There were no jobs advertised in this period.

3. I did apply after the main Christmas week for jobs abroad as they were the only ones advertised.

4. My Personal advisor (DWP) queried my applying overseas. I explained I needed to fulfil the Jobseekers agreement. She then took a long time to scrutinise my logbook/ diary, went to a colleague to discuss my logbook, returned & claimed I had not made enough effort to look for work.

5. This was compounded by fact that I was not required to sign on 4 weeks over Xmas & New Year so could not be advised there might be a problem

6. To date the Decision makers have had my case for over TWO weeks and have not yet made a decision nor asked for any further information.

7. If they do find against me I will of course appeal but this should never have gone to decisions makers in the first place.

8. It is the fault of my Personal advisor, she did not have to refer this given the time of year and I do believe it is malicious.

I suggest that, when you receive an Official Letter from the Decision Makers, that you appeal as you suggest. However, there are a number of jobs portals available (ignoring the banal and malignant Universal Job Match) which, once you have registered, and upload a CV, can apply for jobs 24-7, 365 days a year except when the website is down.

 

It is possible that the JCP Clerk did not refer your case to a Decision Maker, or raise a Sanction Doubt.... some staff offer misinformation to candidates (such as suggesting that it is mandatory to sign up to Universal Job Match when it is not) simply to introduce a "State of Fear" amongst candidates.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi benTen,

 

it was a problem we all faced over Xmas - hitting your job application targets. Most people probably did - especially if they had Internet access.

 

We all know that if you don't hit the agreed number of weekly job applications they will sanction you - so you made yourself a target I'm afraid - they won't let that go by without taking action.

 

Appeal by all means, and good luck.

 

PS - the misinformation around the 'universal job match site' is prevalent - I was told I had to register and I had to give access to my job advisor - both of which are untrue - but I did it to keep them from sanctioning me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Reply to Rebecca :She has referred it to the Decision makers as I got the letter stating this had been done and my benefit has been suspended for the period in question. Two weeks later I'm still waiting.My current benefit for last two weeks should have gone in today and I was told I had met the requirements. You are correct about the Universal Job Match site. They automatically include this in the Job Seekers agreement as if it is mandatory which it isn't & they dont like it when you inform them that you know it isn't and that they shouldn't be lying to claimants. I know I shouldn't provoke them but it still isn't right and they need to be stopped from this kind of behaviour. Wouldn't it be nice if they actually did their job and helped jobseekers find a suitable job. Thanks for your input.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Reply to Lorraine: Yes I perhaps should have forseen this but did not believe they could be so stupid and petty. If i'm still unemployed next Xmas I will apply for something even on Xmas day!!! Still waiting to hear from the Decision makers ( now over two weeks) in meantime have not been paid benefit for those 2 weeks. I should have received this fortnights benefit (sorry JSA) TODAY as Im sure it should be paid in to the P.O. card account 2 days after signing and I was told that I had met the requirements this time so it should be there. Wonder if its not there tomorrow whether I can sue for breach of contract. (Any solicitors out there reading this let me know). Thanks for your input.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi benTEN,

 

I hope you get your money. Breach of contract id an interesting notion - I'd love to see the face of a job advisor if you ran that past them. But you'd be on a hiding to nothing.... and more sanctions.

 

When I signed on again (after many years) I was wholly bemused by the system that is in place, especially the 30 minutes plus interview I get every time I sign on - a waste of time which always concludes with a depressing "let's have a look at the dir.gov.jobs website anyway" - and so another five minutes plodding through the worst jobsite on the web looking at jobs I had already viewed earlier in the week.

 

Hopefully you'll get the money you are due.

 

Signing on - what an eyeopener!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...