Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • its not about the migrants .. Barrister Helena Kennedy warns that the Conservatives will use their victory over Rwanda to dismantle the law that protects our human rights here in the UK.   Angela Rayner made fun of Rishi Sunak’s height in a fiery exchange at Prime Minister’s Questions, which prompted Joe Murphy to ask: just how low will Labour go? .. well .. not as low as sunak 
    • From #38 where you wrote the following, all in the 3rd person so we don't know which party is you. When you sy it was your family home, was that before or after? " A FH split to create 2 Leasehold adjoining houses (terrace) FH remains under original ownership and 1 Leasehold house sold on 100y+ lease. . Freeholder resides in the other Leasehold house. The property was originally resided in as one house by Freeholder"
    • The property was our family home.  A fixed low rate btl/ development loan was given (last century!). It was derelict. Did it up/ was rented out for a while.  Then moved in/out over the years (mostly around school)  It was a mix of rental and family home. The ad-hoc rents covered the loan amply.  Nowadays  banks don't allow such a mix.  (I have written this before.) Problems started when the lease was extended and needed to re-mortgage to cover the expense.  Wanted another btl.  Got a tenant in situ. Was located elsewhere (work). A broker found a btl lender, they reneged.  Broker didn't find another btl loan.  The tenant was paying enough to cover the proposed annual btl mortgage in 4 months. The broker gave up trying to find another.  I ended up on a bridge and this disastrous path.  (I have raised previous issues about the broker) Not sure what you mean by 'split'.  The property was always leasehold with a separate freeholder  The freeholder eventually sold the fh to another entity by private agreement (the trust) but it's always been separate.  That's quite normal.  One can't merge titles - unless lease runs out/ is forfeited and new one is not created/ granted. The bridge lender had a special condition in loan offer - their own lawyer had to check title first.  Check that lease wasn't onerous and there was nothing that would affect good saleability.  The lawyer (that got sacked for dishonesty) signed off the loan on the basis the lease and title was good and clean.  The same law firm then tried to complain the lease clauses were onerous and the lease too short, even though the loan was to cover a 90y lease extension!! 
    • Northmonk forget what I said about your Notice to Hirer being the best I have seen . Though it  still may be  it is not good enough to comply with PoFA. Before looking at the NTH, we can look at the original Notice to Keeper. That is not compliant. First the period of parking as sated on their PCN is not actually the period of parking but a misstatement  since it is only the arrival and departure times of your vehicle. The parking period  is exactly that -ie the time youwere actually parked in a parking spot.  If you have to drive around to find a place to park the act of driving means that you couldn't have been parked at the same time. Likewise when you left the parking place and drove to the exit that could not be describes as parking either. So the first fail is  failing to specify the parking period. Section9 [2][a] In S9[2][f] the Act states  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN fails to mention the words in parentheses despite Section 9 [2]starting by saying "The notice must—..." As the Notice to Keeper fails to comply with the Act,  it follows that the Notice to Hirer cannot be pursued as they couldn't get the NTH compliant. Even if the the NTH was adjudged  as not  being affected by the non compliance of the NTK, the Notice to Hirer is itself not compliant with the Act. Once again the PCN fails to get the parking period correct. That alone is enough to have the claim dismissed as the PCN fails to comply with PoFA. Second S14 [5] states " (5)The notice to Hirer must— (a)inform the hirer that by virtue of this paragraph any unpaid parking charges (being parking charges specified in the notice to keeper) may be recovered from the hirer; ON their NTH , NPE claim "The driver of the above vehicle is liable ........" when the driver is not liable at all, only the hirer is liable. The driver and the hirer may be different people, but with a NTH, only the hirer is liable so to demand the driver pay the charge  fails to comply with PoFA and so the NPE claim must fail. I seem to remember that you have confirmed you received a copy of the original PCN sent to  the Hire company plus copies of the contract you have with the Hire company and the agreement that you are responsible for breaches of the Law etc. If not then you can add those fails too.
  • 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

Customer compliance officer interview queries and concerns


Lady_K
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3991 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

From my experience of sitting next to the compliance team, the guy probably went to his superviser to see if he could get out of having to do a home visit by not doing a compliance check at all, and his boss said no!

 

Nothing triggers these types of compliance checks - a computer randomly picks out claims to do a check on. It is how the DWP get their error and fraud statistics, from the randomly generated compliance checks - so with error and fraud being at 0.7%, you can see how many of these checks happen with no problems at all. And yes, sometimes it is found that the person is getting less than they should - for instance SDP's not being paid are a thing that is commonly picked up on these checks and corrected resulting in increased payment.

  • Confused 1

We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office ~ Aesop

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the moving money between accounts issue shouldn't be too difficult - just pre write a covering letter to go with the statements explaining what you do to keep the accounts open. Is there a reason you need all these accounts? If so put that in the covering letter too.

 

Regarding going over £6000, I doubt you'll get in any trouble for it, just have to pay back a small overpayment. It is £1 taken off your benefit for any week where your capital has been over £6000 during that week, but less than £6250. So if it went over the limit 10 times (during 10 separate weeks), then you'd have to pay £10 back.

 

Hope that helps.

We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office ~ Aesop

Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest I opened the 3 reward accounts simply because they reward £5 a month for each account, thats £15 a month including my main account which works out at £180 a year and its a lot to lose. Halifax have stopped it now though and only allow 1 reward account per person. I have had the accounts for a few years now and have just transferred the 1k a month between them to keep them open but they only changed the rules in April so that you have to have 2 monthly direct debits per account set up before 16th April. Because I found out late about the new rules I set up several dd savings accounts for £1 a month in case some didnt make it in time by 16th April with the intention of stopping the uneeded ones later. I also set up 2 lottery dd in case the savings dd's didnt go out on time with a plan to stop those also once the accounts were saved. If it wasnt for the rewards I wouldnt keep them. Im begining to wonder if they are worth it now.

The previous months before April dont look quite as bad as you can see its straight forward transferring between the accounts but with all the adding savings accounts dd's, the lottery dd's and a few utility dd's until the accounts are saved it looks a mess.

I have already swapped the utility dd's back to my main but that will only show on next months dd. I could close some of the savings accounts now and just keep the necessary 2 per account but I thought it might not look very good until they have sorted this stuff out but then I'll close them.

 

Also could I or the people I pay get into trouble for paying them cash in hand for doing jobs for me?

 

I think you're right that it would just look suspect to be closing down the accounts.

 

Regarding paying people cash - you're not responsible for their business practices or what they declare to HMRC. Most workmen, handymen, plumbers, dogwalkers, cleaners are paid in cash.

We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office ~ Aesop

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Could they ask me to name the people I pay in cash? I don't know if they would want me to.

 

The interview might not be all about the money though, its only a home visit because I've requested that but what are they likely to ask me? will they go through my esa application again or ask me to do anything physical or look around my house? They can look if they want but I just want to know what I should expect

 

No they won't want you to do anything physical or look around your house, it is just about checking that the amount you've been awarded is correct. They are generally looking at bankstatements for amounts going in, but will look at amounts going out if they believe money is being spent deliberately to keep below the capital limit - but this is only when larger amounts are involved, in which case they may ask what the amounts are for. With such complicated bankstatements, they may well just take copies away to look at later. They'll mainly want to check they see all of the relevant paperwork - ID, proof of address, proof of income (for instance other benefits), bankstatements, etc.

 

To answer the first question - if it was a large payment taking you under the capital limit then they might ask what it is for and a receipt for the work.

We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office ~ Aesop

Link to post
Share on other sites

I cant give reciepts for my odd job man and private home help etc as I pay those cash in hand and dont get receipts. My daughter also gets me lump sums of money out every so often so I have money on me for anything I need to pay for, it saves her going back and forth and I just let her know when I'm running low. I just tell her to get the max amount out each time so it lets me which is £300 with halifax. They may think that is a large amount but I cant go myself and I try to cut down on trips to and from the cash machine that my daughters need to do for me. God knows with all this I feel really worried, I just hope they are going to be understanding.

 

everything you've said sounds perfectly reasonable, and I can't see there being a problem at all. They are generally very nice people and understand how stressful the process can be.

We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office ~ Aesop

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, they won't normally know detail about your illness, they are simply there to assess the monetary side of things.

We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office ~ Aesop

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...