Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi all   Firstly, thanks for all the helpful threads on here. Whilst there's a lot to read and get through, it's both helpful and reassuring to see so much great advice and support to others in similar situations.   I've received a letter and a Claim Form from Moriarty for an ADCB CC debt. I'm presently in a DMP for existing UK debts and (probably like many others) I truly don't know the best way forward, as time is clearly of the essence - but I don't feel I've 'up to speed' yet on all the other threads, advice, lingo etc. to respond accordingly.   I'm looking at drafting the PAP and getting it of tomorrow, but just want to get into the other threads to see if it's the right thing (and get more info on similar cases).   Please feel free to comment with any advice - all gratefully received of course. Thanks again for anyone that's posted in other threads and great to see so many kind and generous respondents helping others.
    • nothing you can do can product against the very rare judge lottery syndrome.
    • not sure why you added the blue line I've highlighted? that's no in the we gave you.   as for your question... PRAC's roboclaim computer knows when the account was taken out, after all it raised the claim and checked everything carefully first before issuing the request via northants bulk courts equally inept roboclaim computer... 
    • I've been researching in preparation of compiling my particularised defence/WS.    I'm none too happy that some judges still seem to be siding with DCAs and seemingly brushing aside anything that we have assumed to be "necessary" for DCAs to have a winning case.    Reading a recent "summary" from another poster (another thread with case similar to mine - very old, illegible application form, no default notice, reliance on their own software to prove it was ever sent) and the judgment made in favour of the DCA and even suggesting that there was no "agreement with the DCA, they simply owned the debt, not the agreement"  Makes me very nervous.    Especially if cases like this will be judged on "probability" - the probability that if I signed the original application form, then I must have taken out the credit card and racked up the alleged debt as shown in statements enclosed in their WS (and dated some ten years later).   Is it ok to post some "evidence" I've found from elsewhere?    This is in line with my fears that regardless of how hard one tries to rebut the "lack of evidence" produced by DCAs for chasing these very old "alleged" debts, it does appear to come down to the luck of what judge you get on the day and how much they can be swayed by the DCA solicitor.    A quick Google search produced the following - from one case - this related to a credit agreement - which resulted in someone being made bankrupt - that person appealed the bankruptcy order on the grounds of defective credit agreement and default notice and this was the appeal judge's decision:   The necessary formalities for the entry into the regulated consumer credit agreement (which related to the debt in issue) were not complied with; The default notice served in respect of that credit agreement was defective.   The First Ground The Appellant argued that she did not receive the terms and conditions when she entered into the credit agreement and, accordingly, section 61 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (“CCA”) had not been complied with and the agreement could not be enforced. The agreement had been entered in 1995 and, whilst it had provided a microfiche copy of the front page of the application, the Respondent had been unable to provide a copy of the terms.   Despite the terms not being produced, the District Judge had found that, in the circumstances, it was very likely that such terms existed and would have been provided to the Appellant when she entered into the Agreement. Mr Justice Mann held that this was a finding that the District Judge was entitled to make.   Further, Mr Justice Mann found that it was implicit from the District Judge’s findings that she considered that the terms and conditions not only existed but had been subscribed to by the Appellant’s signature and, consequently, the requirements of section 61 CCA were fulfilled. Mr Justice Mann held that this was also a justifiable finding which should not be interfered with on appeal.   The Second Ground The Appellant also argued that the default notice upon which the Respondent relied did not comply with the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notice) Regulations 1989 because it stated the full balance of the account rather than the total of the missed payments. The Respondent argued that, as a result of the missed payments, it was contractually entitled to the entire balance subject to the service of the appropriate notice, a requirement which was fulfilled by the default notice itself and, consequently, the sum required to remedy the breach was the entire amount.   Mr Justice Mann agreed with the Respondent and the District Judge, holding that: “If by the time the default notice is served circumstances have arisen which entitle the lender to recover not merely sums which might be regarded as arrears, by which I assume is meant accumulated minimum payments, but also the whole of the sum, then they are entitled to claim that sum, and the sum to require to remedy the breach for non-payment of that sum is the payment of the whole sum due. The bank is not confined, at that stage, to claiming merely the amount of arrears if it has an accrued contractual right to have the whole of the sum.”   Do judgments like these not mean that a lot of what you guys do on here (and for which I and many others are VERY grateful) somewhat redundant. What is happening to judges just accepting "well, the terms must have been there if you signed it" -    Feeling quite nervous now.
    • we know it wasn't done to avoid enforcement we understand completely. but that doesn't take from away the fact that it happened   you can't appeal the pcn's on the basis that 'it was not his vehicle to levy upon'. the law clearly states otherwise.          
  • Our picks

marianne698

potential informant threatening claimant!

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2231 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

This is not exactly your everyday situation, however, I have tried to find answers on other websites but failed. I found this site and hope somebody can help. I am a distant relation of those involved and have tried to keep things simple but this has got to stop as been going on for a while.

For information, the eldest, who has confided in me, is extremely ill, physically and mentally (this unnecessary stress is obviously making them worse). The youngest (who is causing the problems) is married with children and works full time.

It surrounds the fact that the younger brother has been sending threatening texts to an elder sibling, and in telephone calls threatened to report the elder to DWP for, as he calls it ‘benefit fraud'.

Indeed, the information the younger brother has obtained, has been done by way of threatening texts/phone calls which may even amount to blackmail or an offence of harassment, at least.

My 1st query is if the younger brother goes ahead and reports sibling to DWP, how does the fact, the way he has obtained information/intelligence/evidence affect any potential prosecution?

Could the way the younger brother has 'handled' the situation and obtained information, make this situation difficult for DWP to prosecute as the information/evidence was obtained unfairly (to the say the least), and as I think illegally, which could taint any evidence that the DWP seek to rely upon?

If it is the case, that because of the way intelligence/evidence has been obtained by the potential DWP informant, and thus making any prosecution difficult, this would obviously put the eldest’s mind at rest, and will obtain further legal advice, if such a need arises.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it is legit harassment, he could take them to court for a restraining order, or if its verbal abuse or continued harassment, then you could get the local police involved to have a word.

 

With DWP, they have procedures to follow. They will investigate any complaints brought to their attention, but they dont prosecute unless they are 100% sure. They will look at the info given, but they will perform their own thorough investigation and not rely on conjecture.


Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with reply but it is the fact that (potential) prosecution evidence has been tainted/obtained unfairly/illegally, and because of this how would this affect a potential prosecution?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO, this is a civil matter.

 

The DWP thrive on malicious calls by disgruntled relatives/friends/spouses etc and regularly receive anonymous tip offs on an hourly basis.

They wouldn't rely on any information they are passed to make any criminal case, they would instigate their own investigation first before pursuing a legal proceedings.

 

The good thing about a phone is you can choose whether or not you answer it, and you can also hang up, if anyone attempted to intimidate or blackmail me over the phone, they should expect to be pulled through it!

 

If he is subject to harassment then that is another matter and should be reported to the police, and if he fears for his safety then an injunction could be sought against the other party.


Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If there is a basis to the accusations then how the info was obtained by the sibling, won't matter - sorry. If the older sibling is fraudulent in their claim then it may be best to come clean themselves, which is looked on much more favourably if it comes to prosecution.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Threatening to report a fact to the authorities is not a crime. Blackmail is instead a crime. Has the offender indeed blackmailed the potential victim? Otherwise I don't see a case here. What a nice family btw!


"Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for Poundland"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the Informants information is 'intelligence' the DWP will assess the intelligence, and if satisfied it passes a certain threshold they will conduct their own preliminary investigation to obtain 'evidence'

They may start to collect 'intelligence material' inthe form of documents, financial investigation, enquiries with hmrc, bank etc.

if satisfied there is a criminal offense of fraud fly claiming benefit they are then faced with a number of choices which include non formal interview, interview under caution, directed surveillance to gather further evidence they may even refer the matter to the Police (most serious of cases involving lots of other people involved) I know of people being called in after being bubbled for fiddling and caught on camera etc. they were just told to sign off from their benefits and would thus avoid prosecution.

If the relative has nothing to hide then they will be ok.

As has already been mentioned it is advisable to fess up if any fiddling has been going on.

 

The DWP investigations dept are very busy and I would imagine that only a handful of 'anonymous reports' go further than a cursory investigation or a face to face interview.


I am fighting it all the way :-x

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many thanks to those who have replied (and yes, there is and always has been sibling rivalry between the 2 concerned) but I don't seem to be putting my point across very well and maybe I should have posted in general legal forum (only reliased that there was 1). I suppose the query I am asking relates to specific law of evidence and how it was/has been obtained. (from further digging) I know that if this information/intelligence (see 1st and 2nd posts) was/had been obtained this way by those conducting any (potential) investigation, then such evidence would be ruled inadmissable (any prosecuting authorities, police, hmce, dwp and others) as they are all bound by codes of practice.

 

But my query still remains unanswered. It is the way that the information/intelligence/evidence had been primarily obtained (by threats and blackmail) by the younger sibling, and how this fact could affect any potential prosecution, for whichever way you look at it, the way these events have occured at the very least 'taint' the whole of the evidence.

 

I suppose I was hoping for someone with legal knowledge to have come across this post and given a definitive answer.

 

Is it possible for admin to copy this post and place in the general legal forum?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

to commence an investigation the investigator only needs suspicion.

where and how that suspicion is formed has to arise from reasonable grounds.

 

those grounds can include anonymous reports, if an intrusion Into private life has occurred as a result of malicious reporting then there is a slim chance of redress providing that the information relied upon came from a source that was notoriously unreliable or flawed such as gained under duress or blackmail. however these are complicated legal arguments to be thrashed out well after an investigation has commenced, action or prosecution leading to a court appearance.

 

it may well be easier to obtain the evidence of the threats and blackmail, provide this to the local dwp investigation team with a notice that any information they may have received has come from a dubious source, submit a freedom of information request as to whether the subject is actually being investigated and state that you will seek redress through the ECHR if it is found that an investigation and intrusion upon the private life of the subject has occurred based solely on the poor quality intelligence.

 

tbh it is a sledgehammer to crack a nut, most investigators know their job and will only start an investigation once there is other corroborating evidence or intelligence to support and thus raise the burden of suspicion to a suitable level.


I am fighting it all the way :-x

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it is highly unlikely that any DWP prosecution (improbable) would take place based purely on the receipt of information from an individual. Further evidence would be obtained which would substantiate that intelligence and any further action taken on that evidence obtained during the investigation.

The DWP do not use CHIS and would not take forward a case on their information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your question has been answered, but I'll restate. If younger sibling is blackmailing or harassing older sibling, this is a separate question.

 

Should the DWP decide to prosecute, they will not be relying on younger siblings claims - they will have done their own investigation independent of said claims, and that's the evidence they'll use in court.


PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING. EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

The idea that all politicians lie is music to the ears of the most egregious liars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope the above has helped, they will look into it, and if there is no corroboration they will file it.

 

a bit like crimestoppers information, the figures are published as to how many reports are received, acted upon and also resulted in arrest, recovery of items, or other action by the authorities such as an onward referral to another agency.

 

be the same with DWP


I am fighting it all the way :-x

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Your question has been answered, but I'll restate. If younger sibling is blackmailing or harassing older sibling, this is a separate question.

 

Should the DWP decide to prosecute, they will not be relying on younger siblings claims - they will have done their own investigation independent of said claims, and that's the evidence they'll use in court.

 

I think the OP may have been watching too much crime drama, and is thinking of something like 'fruit of the poisonous tree', which doesn't apply in this country. And would only apply to actions initiated by police or prosecution, anyway.

 

Some evidence is now not accepted in british courts, but they still are much more relaxed than in the U.S. courts - for instance, if the police said to a person 'we'll pay you to harass and intimidate a suspect until you get the info we want' and this was proven to have happened, then maybe the evidence obtained in this manner would not be accepted. But there is nothing to prevent evidence being accepted from a voluntary source in the scenario set out, it wouldn't even be queried or challenged by the defence.

 

If the relation has committed/is committing fraud, then coming clean is the best defence against the intimidation and harassment, will produce a better result under prosecution, and is the right thing to do.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you again for responses (no, have not been watching to many dramas 'fruit of the poisonus tree'-1st ever heard of). There is another side that concerns me greatly. As said in 1st post am worried, (the eldest, obviously) as I know what he went through for many years when abusing drugs, severe depression (which he still suffers as well as other health problems) attempted suicide on 4 occasions leading to stays in mental health hospital, and for the past good few years he has been 'in recovery'. I am worried that this may set him back and undo all the good work done since his journey on recovery started.

 

I know he does have support from groups but do not know if I am able to do as much as I was hoping.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the first thing to establish is has he been committing benefit fraud. If he has then then the easiest way to end the harassment is to come clean. If he hasn't been committing fraud, then he should report his brother to the police.

 

Obviously, with metal health issues, having to admit to benefit fraud could be very difficult for him - maybe he could find a welfare rights organisation/CAB who would be willing to advocate for him through the process. I had a couple of clients that I did this for while working as a rep.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...