Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I am going to try and explaine in full details from start to present and see if you have any advice for me on what i can do.   on 15/1/2021 16:25pm i was traveling along hazlebarrow Road wich is on my estate at around 30mph, its a tight road with cars parked along the left hand side, as i proceeded through, a van ( which was parked on my left hand side, facing towards me) pulled out from the side of the road, he stopped the van wich resulted in the van being at an angled stationary position on the road. I breaked immediately but the ice and snow skidded my tyers, i skidded into the drivers side of his van, my car bounced off his van and sent my vehicle head first into the back of a parked car ( wich was originally parked at the back of the van before he set off from the side of the road. I will refer to the van driver as MR S. ( im going to attatch a street view picture and diagram which will be more helpful in understanding how the accident accured ect) .    The owner of the parked car, which i will refer to as Mr T came out of his house. Myself, mr S and mr T exchanged details and took photos, then i left the scene as my first concern, understandably was to contact my midwife and the hospital. I live just round the corner from the scene of the accident so i slowly drove my car to my property.   I contacted Go skippy the next day 16/1/21 and informed them of the accident and gave them all the details ect.   by the following monday 18/1/21 i had a call from AX who said they was dealing with my claim as go skippy will not deal with it as i am third party insured. Over the next few days, i complied with their requests ( gave them a written statment of what happened, sent them pictures of the damage to my vehicle and MR S van ect).   Then on the 19/1/21 AX contacted me again and asked if i need a curtesy vehicle, my first response was ' how much will that cost me?' Of which she replied ' nothing because your insurance covers the cost'. I agreed to the curtesy vehicle and the vehicle was delivered to me on the 20/1/21.    Over the coming weeks, AX and i had regular contact about my claim and updated me in regards to my own vehicle. At one point she said it could be deemed a 50/50 liability.   An engineer had collected my car, deemed in a total loss as the damage was more than 66% of its total value and written my car off . i had a call from a lady from AX and she said they have valued the car and i will be payed out £2200 . i asked when and she said ' we will send you a cheque out for £358 in the post, and the remaining balance will be payed out by Admirel but this may take a few weeks more' .    I didnt hear nothing for around 2 weeks so i contacted AX again for an update, she told me that admirel are refusing liability and there now in dispute. Every time i contacted them they said the same thing ' admirel are refusing liability'.   i asked them why admirel consider them not liable and she read from the notes ' MR S said he was driving along the road, the corsa ( my vehicle) was at high speed coming towards me , i beeped my horn and tried moving out of the way but i couldnt because of the ice and the snow and the corsa hit my van' ( complete lie!!)   The lady at AX said the problem is that the damage to both our vehicles is consistant with both our stories and due to there being no witnesses, no cctv or dash cam footage- no one can prove who is at fault.   I then questioned why i had been told i was being paid out £2200 and she said 'well we have to advice you the estimated value' of which i replied 'no, there was no 'advice' - i was told it was a done deal i was getting paid £2200 and she told me i had a cheque arriving in the post!!!.    The lady then told me she had requested a ' none prejudice payment' from admirel and waiting for a response.     Shortly after this phone call, AX contacted me again and asked if i had the funds to repair my own vehicle or buy another one, ( im.assuming admirel refused to pay the  none prejudice payment).   I told them No i do not as i have a baby due and even if i did have the funds, why on earth would i fork out to repair my own vehicle when i wasnt at fault ?! . she said ok im going to pass this to managment and see what we can do .     I contacted AX again and asked for an update and expressed how unhappy i was with their service as i felt like they hadnt fought my corner, bowed down to admirel and then had the cheek to ask me to repair my own vehicle . Again she said ' its still in dispute, admirel are not budging i have to pass this on to management.   She then asked me for 3 months bank statements to 'prove' i dont have the funds to repair my vehicle myself. I thought this was ridiculous and stated that even if i had the funds, why would i repair my own vehicle when im.not at fault!?   Obviously this has been on going since middle of january, pretty fed up. My brother come to this forum last night to seek advice And had a couple of replies that i may be liable to pay for the hire car costs.   I contacted AX first thing this morning regarding this. I made it clear that they can collect the vehicle to stop the daily charges as i do not want to be in thousands of pounds worth of debt when i am a lone parent with a new born baby. the lady told me ' we will try every avenue to recover the cost from Admirel for the hire car charges, if this means taking them to court, even if this is unsuccessful, considering you comply with your hire vehicle contract and you work with us with your claim ( which you have been doing) you will not be liable for this debt and if worst comes to worst and admirel will not pay, we will just wipe the debt off' .   i made her repeat several times that i will not be liable for this debt and she said i have told you my name, and these calls are recordered and i am telling you that this debt will not be on you to pay . She then said that if i was to give AX the hire car back now, then it would jepordise everything. And she said ' we gave you that hire vehicle because we beleive your not at fault so you can keep using it as we know you need transport'   I then questioned the need for bank statements again and she told me the reason they need bank statements is so if it goes to court - AX can justify why i needed the hire car for so long ( because i dont have the funds to repair my vehicle or buy another one) and also so they can prove they have tried every root possible.      After the phonecall it got me thinking about how she said ' aslong as you comply with your hire car contract your not liable for any charges for the hire car' .   Will they find any fault with the contract just to try and lumber me with the debt? As it seems pretty fishy how they would just ' wipe off' thousands of pounds if admirel refuse to pay.    And also, she said if i gave the hire car back it would jepodise the case . so when the lady rang me the other week asking if i had funds to repair or buy myself a new vehicle , if i had said yes, ill buy a car tomorrow and come collect the curtesy one. Then what? Wouldnt that ' jepodise' the case?      As you can imagaine, my heads spinning. Stressed and dont know what to do. I dont even care about a pay out , i just want to give the hire car back and be completely done with AX . but now im scared if i give the car back i will be lumbered with thousand of pounds worth of debt from the hire car charges.    What can/should i do?    Thank you Gemma
    • Hi Ade,   Stop speaking to them by phone and keep contact in writing only, which you've said you prefer.   Send TT a SAR by post immediately. The data you get back should enable you to see what they think you owe, and how it's made up.   Also write to BW Legal confirming you dispute the alleged debt owed to TT and have written to TT seeking data, so BWL must stop demands until TT have replied to the SAR you've sent them.
    • Please do although obviously I don’t know the facts from your side but at least I can tell you how much of a cut and paste job it is.
    • Please check back for a full reply tomorrow. However, it would help if you would introduce pergo spaces into a story full stop it's very long and especially for people with small screens it's very difficult to follow when it is so compacted.   I think this straight has become rather confused because of the third party account which we received at the outset. I think it will probably be helpful if you could repost your story but on a new thread and more openly spaced please.   Then we can start to have a closer look at it. However, as I've already suggested, I think there are two issues. The question of your liability in the accident and the problem of how you have been persuaded to take a rental car at such a high rate.    I would suggest that you hold off telephoneing anyone until we have had a closer look.before you do anything on the telephone. You have obviously had some very important conversations but you don't have any evidence of them. Although the other side may say that they have recorded them, you you may find it difficult to get hold of those recordings if in fact those recordings incriminate them in any way. for instance if they have promised you that you don't have to pay anything for the hire car, that would be an extremely useful conversation to have but you may find that it is difficult to get hold of.   please start a new thread it will be much easier to continue from there                                
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 33 replies
  • Recommended Topics

400,000 people had their Jobseekers sanctioned


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2652 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

  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I did read that - it's pretty bad. As the CPAG guy pointed out, if sanctions were really effective, there'd be fewer of them, not more.

 

As to how JCP staff sleep at night, well, would you prefer that they all walked out and that there was no-one to pay benefits? How would that be a help to claimants?

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

G4s employ sadists (note the job requirement if you want to join their firm) and they like hurting people. I expect they sleep well just like any good Nazi.

Edited by Perseus1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think many don't care or claim it's the jobseekers fault

Some I have met would probably reach ecstasy at sanctioning people

Plus many claim to only worry about the rules

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's something about this on Twitter. I can't understand at all why you get sanctioned for missing your signing on appointment if your reason for missing it is because you have an interview. If you miss the interview, you'd be sanctioned too.

Link to post
Share on other sites
There's something about this on Twitter. I can't understand at all why you get sanctioned for missing your signing on appointment if your reason for missing it is because you have an interview. If you miss the interview, you'd be sanctioned too.

Sounds like jobsworths

Link to post
Share on other sites
There's something about this on Twitter. I can't understand at all why you get sanctioned for missing your signing on appointment if your reason for missing it is because you have an interview. If you miss the interview, you'd be sanctioned too.

 

I never had a problem with that - if I had an interview I called the office and asked if I could sign early or late and they were always OK with it.

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just found out I have missed a contract job because I was too busy messing about with the Work Programme. Extremely ****ed off. Rival got it instead which makes it worse as I am better at it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

With jobcentre staff (not counting the bad employees which you get everywhere), what are they supposed to do? It has been made public that there are targets and staff are monitored for the number of sanctions and face action if they are not seen to be performing.

 

If you are on the sharp end of administering the system, the last thing you want to do is resign, be sacked or be more likely to be chosen for redundancy due to ethical issues with sanctions. The one thing worse than having a job you hate at the moment is having no job at all and having to claim JSA - seeing your colleagues every two weeks when you sign.

 

There is no right path for these people.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tip: if you miss a JobCentre signing on appointment, the best thing to say is you are ill with a cold. This is easiest for them and they can OK your money straight away. After you have filled in a form and signed it. Make it more complicated and it might have to go to an assessor and it will be delayed even more.

 

I expect you can only do this once, perhaps twice, a year.

 

With the WP it might be best to go in even if you are badly ill.

Edited by Perseus1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Tip: if you miss a JobCentre signing on appointment, the best thing to say is you are ill with a cold. This is easiest for them and they can OK your money straight away. Make it more complicated and it might have to go to an assessor and it will be delayed even more.

 

I expect you can only do this once, perhaps twice, a year.

 

With the WP it might be best to go in even if you are badly ill.

 

No, they can't OK your money - you need to complete and return form JSA28 before you can be paid if you miss a signing on day.

 

You're correct in that you can only do this twice in any rolling one year period, for a maximum of 14 days for each. During that time you can be exempted from actively seeking employment, and that includes mandatory WP appointments. Someone who is forced to miss a WP appointment through illness should also contact the Provider.

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Tip: if you miss a JobCentre signing on appointment, the best thing to say is you are ill with a cold. This is easiest for them and they can OK your money straight away. Make it more complicated and it might have to go to an assessor and it will be delayed even more.

 

I expect you can only do this once, perhaps twice, a year.

 

With the WP it might be best to go in even if you are badly ill.

I have been ill whilst on the WP with no issues apart from a staff member who didn't know anything

Link to post
Share on other sites
At least they don't have problems with arthritis

 

At least people with arthritis still have their limbs. We could go on like this all night.

 

Just don't intentionally spread contaminants around the place, people. It's not rocket science to figure out why it's a terrible idea.

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
If you get ill the WP think you are skiving. My interpretation of their punitive measures.

 

What they "think" is irrelevant. If you're covered by a JSA28, you can't be sanctioned.

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
What they "think" is irrelevant. If you're covered by a JSA28, you can't be sanctioned.

 

It might prompt them to send a non-compliance form to the Job Centre, if they are vindictive or they don't like you anyway. They have done that already though. They might even fill in one of the fraud forms. Even if you are innocent, they go over your claim with a fine tooth comb and they may find a procedural abnormality (e.g they have mislaid a form). It has happened before. It is really confusing.

 

Or why am I getting grief?

Edited by Perseus1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You're getting "grief" (if you choose to characterise it that way) because what you are saying is not true and could cause people reading this unnecessary distress.

 

If you fail to show up to a WP appointment, the provider will send a referral to the Jobcentre. When the DM looks at it and sees the period is covered by a JSA28, they will take no further action.

 

WP providers can't fill in fraud forms and JCP staff don't have time to hassle every jobseeker who ever missed an appointment because of a nasty cold or a bout of stomach flu.

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
You're getting "grief" (if you choose to characterise it that way) because what you are saying is not true and could cause people reading this unnecessary distress.

 

If you fail to show up to a WP appointment, the provider will send a referral to the Jobcentre. When the DM looks at it and sees the period is covered by a JSA28, they will take no further action.

 

WP providers can't fill in fraud forms and JCP staff don't have time to hassle every jobseeker who ever missed an appointment because of a nasty cold or a bout of stomach flu.

 

 

Sorry. I am over-reacting. I think I am being investigated (too much for coincidence). Somebody must have started it as I have not done anything wrong.

 

WP have been hostile from the very beginning. Not just ordinary. Everything was an accusation. I did not go into the WP with any preconceived notions, except I expected them to be helpful (or at least neutral).

 

 

Unless investigations are obligatory for anyone signing on WP.

 

Missing a Jobcentre signing-on is a bit of a hassle and it is best to make it in if you can.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed - missing a signing on day is hassle, even if covered by a JSA28, since you need to get hold of the form and then get it back to JCP before any payment can be issued.

 

As to your being investigated, do you have any particular reason to believe this? I mean, many folks here have reported hostility and other unpleasantness from their WP advisers, but WP advisers have no say on fraud investigations. Perhaps it's just that they're clueless, offensive and have cynical motives. If someone has falsely reported you for fraud, say, the WP staff won't know anything about it.

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Agreed - missing a signing on day is hassle, even if covered by a JSA28, since you need to get hold of the form and then get it back to JCP before any payment can be issued.

 

As to your being investigated, do you have any particular reason to believe this? I mean, many folks here have reported hostility and other unpleasantness from their WP advisers, but WP advisers have no say on fraud investigations. Perhaps it's just that they're clueless, offensive and have cynical motives. If someone has falsely reported you for fraud, say, the WP staff won't know anything about it.

 

Thanks for the reply.

 

Yep, I know as certain I can be I have been reported both under the following procedures

 

1) raising doubts over my compliance with the work programme mandates, but I have complied with my Job Centre agreement

2) reported as suspected fraud

 

Both occurred less than week after I visited my WP Advisor. Two separate occasions.

 

I can read people well enough to hazard a guess who made the reports.

 

This is not clueless (except in the sense of without evidence or clues), sneaky and underhand rather than offensive, and vindictive rather than cynical. It is a toxic environment there at G4s. I know the difference between deliberate bullying and zealots.They are out of control.

 

Other participants said that the direct sanctions were threatening but did not work. Although, it is obvious that some people have had their benefit suspended although in the one case I know the sanctions seem to have been overturned before a formal appeal.

 

I know from talking to other people I am being treated worse than other people. The Manager has intervened in two out of three interviews.

 

But this is the same old story. But it is not, it is much worse than other reports with people taken into a separate room and group berated like a criminal by three or four people. I have not reports of this happening elsewhere. I think I would report it to the Police under threatening behaviour if if happened to me.

 

The only action I have taken is I asked by Job Advisor not to pass any confidential information on to the WP Advisor. She has said she is allowed to because of the data protection restrictions, but that does not mean senior officers cannot do this under the contract.

 

I think I might have to put this is writing to the Job Centre. Who should I address the letter to please? This is a risky procedure because they may contact the WP and escalate the conflict and make reconciliation fraught, not just impossible.

 

I first of all but the conflict down to incompatible personalities but it is gone past that now.

Edited by Perseus1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...