Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • This must be part of the new tactic from Evri.  They know they are going to lose. They take it to the wire and then don't bother to turn up in order to save themselves costs and of course they don't give a damn about the cost to the British taxpayer and the extra court delays they cause. This is a nasty dishonest company – but rather in line with all of the parcel delivery industry which knows that their insurance requirements are unlawful. They know that their prohibited items are for the most part unfair terms. They know for the most part that a "safe place" is exactly what it means – are not left on somebody's doorstep in full view. They know that obtaining a signature means that they have to show the signature not simply claim that they received a signature. They are making huge profits especially from their unlawful and unenforceable insurance requirement. Although this is less valuable than the PPI scandal, in terms of the number of people who are affected nationwide, PPI pales into insignificance. I hope the paralegals working for Evri are proud of themselves and they tell their families what they have done during the day when they go home.
    • Your PCN does not comply with the Protection of freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9[2][a] (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates; The only time on the PCN is 17.14. That is only  a time for there to be a period there would have to be a start and and end time mentioned. of course they do show the ANPR arrival and departures  times but that is not the parking period and their times are on the photographs not on the PCN. They also failed to comply with S.9[2][f] as they omitted to say that they could only pursue the keeper if they complied with the Act. That means that they can only pursue the driver as the keeper cannot be held liable for the charge. As they do not know who was driving and Courts do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person they will struggle to win. Especially as so many people are able to legally drive your car and you haven't appealed giving them no indication therefore of who was driving. Small nitpicking point-the date of Infringement was 22/04/2024. They appear to be saying that they can charge an extra amount [up to £70 ] if they have to use a debt collector. You do not have a contract with a debt collector so they cannot add that cost. You paid for four hours so it can only be the 15 minutes they are complaining about. You are entitled to a ten minute minimum grace period at the end of the parking period which would be easier to explain if the car park had been bigger. However if you allow for two minutes to park and two minutes to leave that gives you one minute to account for. Things like being held on the way out by cars in front waiting to get on to Northgate or even your own car being held up trying to get on to Northgate at a busy time. then other considerations like having to stop to allow pedestrians to walk in front of you or being held up by another car doing a u turn in front of your car. you would have to check with the driver and see if they could account for an extra one minute things like a disabled passenger or having to strap in a child . I am not advocating lying since that could lead to serious problems [like jail time] but there can be an awful lot of minor things that can cause a hold up of a minute even the engine not starting straight away or another car being badly parked as examples. Sadly you cannot include the 5 minute Consideration period as both IPC and BPA fail to comply with the convention that you can include that time with the Grace period.  
    • Defence struck out not case struck out...you have judgment  Well done topic title updated Regard's Please consider making a donation if not already to support us to help others.   Andy.   .
    • Hi all, I wanted to update you and thank you all for your help. I am delighted announce that after the case was struck out due to no response from Evri, judgement was issued after I submitted the forms and I was just about to take it to warrant.  today I received an email from the claims department requesting my bank details to make payment for my full award. The process has been long since the initial proceedings  in January i must say your help and guidance has been greatly appreciated.  
    • Quote of the century "Farage pops up when the country’s at a low ebb; like a kind of political herpes" - Frankie Boyle Updates
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

A friend's JSA sanction, possibly due to Work Programme, needs to claim Hardship Allowance


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3932 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

Hello,

 

I'm in the process of dealing with a friend's JSA claim and possible claim for Hardship Allowance.

 

My friend suffers from pretty bad depression and, although he has informed the DWP about this since it started nearly two months ago, has struggled to keep both appointments with his GP concerning treatment and with the Work Programme he was assigned to.

 

This has essentially arisen from the passing of a family member which he mentioned around a month and a half ago when he failed to attend an initial Work Programme meeting, which they were fine with. They scheduled a follow-up appointment via post which he failed to attend as he received the letter after the scheduled appointment time. He submitted a letter for this and they were again fine with this overall. But they made another appointment for the Work Programme on July 26th which he failed to attend (one of the coexistent symptoms is insomnia, so he woke up late). While waiting for someone to get in contact with him concerning rearranging the appointment again, he received a letter stating he was to be sanctioned for four weeks starting from August 1st.

 

As the letter arrived Friday he was unable to do anything about it immediately and this has caused him a great deal of stress, which is why I've agreed to help him sort everything out.

 

So, here's where the questions come.

 

Firstly, after reading the relevant parts of Chapter 35 of the Decision Maker's guide online, I've pieced together that he should be able to claim Hardship Allowance following an initial 14 day period, so for the final two weeks of his sanction. This would involve filling in form JSA10 from the Jobcentre which he is going to collect tomorrow. However, I've read on another post here that people sanctioned due to the Work Programme are unable to claim Hardship Allowance at all. Is this correct? The letter doesn't state that the sanction is due to this, but it's pretty much assumed since the Work Programme was the only appointment he missed.

 

Secondly, I am also planning on launching an appeal for the sanction on his behalf. I'm unsure how much of his depression has been noted by the DWP but I know he has disclosed this information on the previous two occasions mentioned and they have been fine with this. I've downloaded form GL24, with the aim of completing it and handing it directly to the Jobcentre tomorrow. It mentioned I can request a Statement of Reasons to outline why the sanction was imposed, but that limits the time to appeal down to just 14 days from when the request is received.

 

Is it worth requesting a Statement of Reasons before launching the appeal? Also, how long does it take to receive this? And can they provide information behind the reasoning of the sanction over the phone?

 

This is all a little new to me. I've had one sanction myself before but I successfully appealed it straight away and there was no noticeable impact on my own benefits (aside from a slightly higher phonebill from having to nag them constantly, hehe).

 

Thanks again for reading this and for any/all help provided in advance.

 

Chris

 

(PS. I feel obligated to mention that MachoShirts is actually an anagram of my name. I just realised the name sounds a little bit yob-ish.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I'll just provide an update on how things panned out, in case it may help others in a similar situation.

 

I was advised to take the step prior to launching an appeal, which is to ask for a reconsideration of the sanction via letter. I sent an initial letter around August 13th outlining my friend's battle with depression and how it has affected his day to day life, including his ability to sleep and make appointments on time, and how this relates to his sanction. Then, on August 15th, he received a letter concerning a second sanction for the same period due to another missed appointment. I then placed another letter in on the same day asking for them to reconsider this decision too while summarising what was said in the initial letter.

 

On Monday, I called up to see if there was a response. They declined to reconsider the sanction as they stated he should've had put steps in place to make sure he was able to attend interviews, as well as the fact that the reasons stated appeared to have no impact on his ability to make DWP-based appointments.

 

On the same day, he attended an appointment concerning claiming Hardship Allowance for the period of sanction. He outlined his depression as his reason for hardship and the advisor classified him as 'at risk', meaning he was able to receive hardship allowance at a rate of 40% less than his benefit entitlement which was backdated to the beginning of his sanction, eliminating the 14 day waiting period. He's decided not to launch an appeal against his sanction as the money he receives from hardship will be enough to see him through.

 

He wasn't asked for any evidence from his GP as it was stated in all documents that initial appointments were upcoming.

 

Not sure if that will be helpful to anyone, but I thought it'd help just to post an update.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for posting the details of your friend. It has some similarities to my situation, and it may help me, so thanks again.

 

I have been told that the Social Security Administration Act states that no money can be deducted or passed onto another party. I am looking into this more, as I believe sanctions are not legal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just found out that the Local Government Act 1888 states that money cannot be taken away.

Another one is the Local Government Finance Act 1992 s13A also says the same.

Something else that must be relevant is the National Insurance Act which provides for living expenses, housing and health care.

 

I feel sure that at least some of these, as well as the Act mentioned in my last post MUST apply. I only wish there was someone with legal knowledge who might be able to clarify the position. Here's hoping.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Following on from my last post, I have just discovered that the DWP must pay you during the appeal stage. I have requested this in my letters but have heard nothing.

 

For anyone whose money has been stopped, get appealling and request the assessment rate NOW because all this is changing in October with the introduction of Clause 99.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry I missed your replies there, Sparkles. I'm not a legal guru by any means, but I'll have a look into this since my friend's Hardship Allowance is repayable and he shouldn't be making repayments if the DWP weren't allowed to sanction him in the first place.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you. Any help would be appreciated. There are so many of us fighting this nightmare..

I don't think I mentioned the Suspension & Termination guides. They state that a decision must take into account whether it will caused hardship. These surely must apply.

 

I know for certain that the Social Security Administration Act applies, and I feel sure there must be a way of enforcing this Act. The DWP cannot simply keep ignoring all these laws.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...