Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

DWP. FOI request


postggj
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4120 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

i made a request under the Freedom Of Information Act on the DWP DATED 22ST DECEMBER

 

After repeated requests for them to comply with my request, i contacted the information commissionaires office. The ICO gave the DWP 10 days to comply with my request which expires this friday. I have now received this from the DWP

 

IN THE FIRST SENTANCE, THE DWP mention correspondence dated 21ST January. That is when i submitted a complaint as to my original requested dated the 22nd december.

 

 

 

You requested an internal review of DWP’s handling of FoI request, “Information and details of

 

Universal Jobmatch”, due to delayed response in your correspondence dated 21

st January,

 

28

th January and 4th February.

 

The review was conducted by an independent official of the Department, of the relevant grade

 

and authority to carry out such requests. The case has been examined afresh, and guidance

 

has been sought from domain experts to ensure all factors were taken fully into account.

 

I acknowledge that in this instance, the Department failed to respond within 20 working days

 

and the DWP apologise for the delay. This is due to a number of factors including the

 

unexpected level of correspondence received by the team. FOI requests are often complex or

 

require input from a number of different areas e.g. policy, commercial, design teams who need

 

to be consulted to ensure that all FOI requests are fully considered before being responded to.

 

All FOI requests are dealt with by individuals in addition to their day to day workloads and in

 

some cases this will lead to delays

. Accordingly, I hope to let you have a response by 19

 

March 2013.

 

If you have any queries about this letter please contact the DWP Central FoI Team quoting the

 

reference number above.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

DWP Central FoI Team

 

 

 

This FOI SENT IS POSTED BELOW

 

Dear Department of Work and Pension

 

Please supply information & details on the universal job match program instigated by the DWP in line with this Freedom of Information Act Request

 

1/ If a job seekers claimant declines access to the job centre advisor to their universal job match account, will they be sanctioned.

 

2/ is it mandatory or voluntary and part of the job seekers agreement to comply with a request for registration to universal job match by a job centre adviser

 

3/ Why are claimants not being told that they will be giving a waiver to the DWP to override their Data Protection Rights in signing up for universal job match

4/ The universal job match system uses tracking cookies to monitor claimants behaviour on the universal job match site. Do these tracking cookies allow information to be gathered on other non applicable web sites not related to universal job match.

 

5/ In signing up for access by DWP personal to the claimants universal job site, is that not in contravention of Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights Act "the right to respect for private and family life, home and correspondence (please supply exemptions) via a threat of sanctions for non compliance.

 

6/ Is not signing up for the universal job match program, and allowing a third party access not in contravention of the Data Protection Act 1998, and EU Law, in that a data subject cannot be forced to sign anything in direct contravention of the said act by way of a sanction for failure to comply with an instruction from a government official.

 

7/ is it not fact that UK legislation has to be compatable with EU legislation in regards to the Human Rights Act and Directives in respect of Data protection

 

8/ The company chosen to host the universal job match system is a US company called monster world wide. Will the data collated on the monster world wide hosting site (universal job match) remain in the UK, or transmitted outside the European union, and if so, where will that data be stored.

 

9/ Will the data gathered on the universal job match site be accessed by third parties, including different departments within the UK and foreign governments

 

yours faithfully

 

 

 

it seems the DWP just does not want to answer my questions, comments please and the DWP now expects me to wait a further 4 weeks

 

22nd december request made, 20 working days to comply

new date for a possible compliance 19th march

 

Thats a total of 58 WORKING DAYS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by squaddie
Link to post
Share on other sites

same with me....asking about atos recorded assessment and the regs on that....ie equipment, and no shows recorded when claimant did show etc etc.....seems I am being ignored.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...