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

Housing Benefit, Council Tax Support


odds
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4096 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 mentioned this earlier in someone elses thread so I don't know if it was picked up on so maybe someone might like to comment on this strange analogy by my local council.

 

According to the latest award letter from my Local Authority they have stated that for my

Housing Benefit the MINIMUM I need to live on is £305.

Council Tax Support the MINIMUM I need to live on is £278

 

I know that in their wisdom they have decided not to include certain elements of benefits, therefore making your 'excess' income higher and so you pay more Council Tax but I think someone has seriously messed up here, or is it just me being pedantic.

How on earth can you have 2 different MINIMUM amounts to live on depending on which bill you are paying ?

 

I have tried getting an explanation from the 'Help Line' but the best I can get is "it's because of the changes in Central Government" .... I gave up after 10 minutes trying to explain that you can only have one minimum amount, cos if you have 2 different amounts only one can be a minimum.

 

I then noticed that on my award letter they said my Weekly Council Tax Liability was £18.11, so having got a bee in my bonnet I checked my Council Tax Bill, which is £944.42 for the period 01/04/2013 to 31/03/2014 (52 weeks).

For the record according to the Benefits department and going off my Weekly Council Tax Liability they stated, the total for 52 weeks(1 year) = £941.72 a difference of £2.70.

 

I know it's not much but I am getting really wound up by now by getting no reasonable explanations, so I phoned the Council Tax Office and asked them how much it should be per week on my property over the year, you really couldn't make up the reply I got,

"It depends how many weeks you work it out over":doh:

I eventually managed to get through to her, that it was her department that sends out bills for a 12 month period, 1 year, 52 weeks ...... it doesn't matter how you pay or how many weeks you work it out over the property has a yearly/weekly Tax Liability. So she worked it out eventually and came up with £18.17 weekly Tax Liability. A difference of 6p to what the Benefit Office are saying.

She advised me to speak to them about it as it was them that sent the letter, by this time I'm thinking there is a problem here, Council Tax Office, Council Tax Benefits Office and I'm getting 2 different amounts quoted from each .......left hand right hand spring to mind.

 

So I phone the Benefits section and question the difference, and they said you would need to phone the Council Tax Office about it, I explained that I had and they said speak to you and she offered to phone them on my behalf. At this point I had already got a rope hanging from the bannister, so I just hung up sat down counted to 100 and thought......... what the hell have I just achieved. NOTHING.. I am no wiser as to any of my questions at all.

 

Pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

Issue 1 - minimum amont you need to live on

When Lovcal Authorities calculate HB/CTB/CTRS, they carry out a means test by comparing your household income against your household applicable amount

 

The applicable amount is calculated by totalling allowances for your family members and additional premiums for certain special circumstances e.g. where you have a disability or caring responsibility

 

Local Authorities and DWP have often referred to the applicable amount as "the amount the government says you need to live on" or similar terms. This is to make it easier to understand for some claimants who might get confused by the term applicable amount. The term "the amount the government says you need to live on" does not really exist anywhere in law.

 

Traditionally the applicable amount for HB and CTB have been identical as the regulations were virtually identical, however from 1 April 2013, CTB is abolished and will be replaced by CTRS (Council Tax Reduction Schemes). Each Local Authority has been expected to design their own local scheme and can therefore set a different method for calculation an applicable amount for CTRS.

 

Assuming the 2 letters both relate to the same period, it appears from your post that your Local Authority's new scheme allows for the applicable amount for CTRS to be calculated differently to HB. If that is the case, they should really have amended their letters to explain how they have calculated the 2 different amounts.

 

By looking at the letters, can you tell which element(s) of the 2 applicable amounts are different?

 

 

Issue 2 - annual v weekly charge

To calculate weekly council tax charge, you: -

 

  1. first convert from annual to daily by dividing by 365
  2. then convert from daily to weekly by multiplying by 7

i.e. £944.42 divided by 365 then multipied by 7 = £18.11

 

 

I find it shocking that your Local Authority could not answer your questions, but not surprising, as frequently those on the phones these days are either: -

 

  • generic customer service with no background knowledge
  • revs and bens staff who know how to input data into a computer, but not how the computer then works things out

If you have found my post useful, please click on the star at the bottom of my post and add some reputation points.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

By looking at the letters, can you tell which element(s) of the 2 applicable amounts are different?

 

I can understand where they have made changes, Family Element of £17.40 and Disabiity Element is reduced by £9.40 which means I have 'excess' income and therefore we will have that thank you very much, so I now pay 100% Council Tax of £93 pm.

My gripe is the statement that says you NEED a minimum amount to live on and come up with two different amounts. Like you said, it should be worded correctly.

 

I find it shocking that your Local Authority could not answer your questions, but not surprising,

 

After writing to them in February and waiting 3 weeks for a reply and getting my documents returned to me I decided to phone and make sure it had been delivered to them. She acknowledged that they had received it and I should have had my documents by now.

As I had not had them returned I was advised that I would have to take it up with the Post Office as it would have been sent back to me, although they have no proof of postage but they sign a book when letters are posted out. So we then had an interesting conversation about how am I supposed to chase up a letter that you posted. The documents turned up the following week, they were posted four days after the above telephone conversation.

These are the sort of people that are supposed to give you help/advice, is it any wonder people just give up.

God, they wind me up.

 

Pete.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Issue 1 - minimum amont you need to live on

When Lovcal Authorities calculate HB/CTB/CTRS, they carry out a means test by comparing your household income against your household applicable amount

 

The applicable amount is calculated by totalling allowances for your family members and additional premiums for certain special circumstances e.g. where you have a disability or caring responsibility

 

Local Authorities and DWP have often referred to the applicable amount as "the amount the government says you need to live on" or similar terms. This is to make it easier to understand for some claimants who might get confused by the term applicable amount. The term "the amount the government says you need to live on" does not really exist anywhere in law.

 

Traditionally the applicable amount for HB and CTB have been identical as the regulations were virtually identical, however from 1 April 2013, CTB is abolished and will be replaced by CTRS (Council Tax Reduction Schemes). Each Local Authority has been expected to design their own local scheme and can therefore set a different method for calculation an applicable amount for CTRS.

 

Assuming the 2 letters both relate to the same period, it appears from your post that your Local Authority's new scheme allows for the applicable amount for CTRS to be calculated differently to HB. If that is the case, they should really have amended their letters to explain how they have calculated the 2 different amounts.

 

By looking at the letters, can you tell which element(s) of the 2 applicable amounts are different?

 

 

Issue 2 - annual v weekly charge

To calculate weekly council tax charge, you: -

 

  1. first convert from annual to daily by dividing by 365
  2. then convert from daily to weekly by multiplying by 7

i.e. £944.42 divided by 365 then multipied by 7 = £18.11

 

 

I find it shocking that your Local Authority could not answer your questions, but not surprising, as frequently those on the phones these days are either: -

 

  • generic customer service with no background knowledge
  • revs and bens staff who know how to input data into a computer, but not how the computer then works things out

 

In short its down to the fact people like myself cannot ring up and speak to someone who makes decisions and has influence on policy, the people on the phones are there to fob people like me off.

 

In an absolute best case scenario a message may get recorded by the phone operator and passed on, and then read by someone important, but even then that person doesnt communicate with me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...