Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • According to Wikipedia - yeah, I know - the site is owned by Croydon Council. It's at least worth a try to contact the council and ask for a contact in The Colonnades. You could then lay it on thick about being a genuine customer and ask them to call their dogs off. It's got to be worth a try  https://www.croydon.gov.uk/contact-us/contact-us  
    • 4 hours were soft play with the kids then moved to one of the restaurants for a meal. Restaurant took ages with our order but it was a group of parents so we were in no massive rush.  Ive been trying to find how to determine 100% if the road is public or not as I just based my assumption on the street signs, traffic lights and the bus. Regarding the PCN, does it covers all requirements needed to enforce or do you guys see any clear weak spots? Considering the size of the place and different areas and businesses reachable through that road where the cameras are, I believe is a massive assumption to use those photographs to calculate the time someone was actually parked in a designated parking spot as there are numerous other areas to load, unload, wait for people, drive throughs of restaurants, etc all within the area accessible through the one road where the ANPR is. One can go through most of the areas on street view in google. You can even see a car parked in the middle of the roundabout for example.
    • thought your story rang a bell. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/416315-knightsbridgecreditfix-iva-treated-me-very-badly-thinking-of-bk-now-help/ you vanished and never cameback. dx  
    • and it legally informs them of your correct and current address as you must do with all old debts last paid/used in say 7 yrs you dont want backdoor CCJ's. what were the names of these IVA scammers, the one you took it out with, and the one that scammed you to let them take over please? your story is slightly worrying. dx  
    • Incidentally, congratulations on not buying the warranty. That is another Big Motoring World rip-off. See what we have to say about extended warranties and the Big Motoring World attitude to them is particularly unhelpful
  • 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

Can Edinburgh Council decline Second Adult Rebate?


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3865 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

Hi Folks,

 

I moved to Edinburgh whilst looking for work. I'm on IB-JSA and applied for Housing and Council Tax Benefit. I have been awarded both but not the Second Adult Rebate that I specifically applied for. I share the flat with another person who is in Full-Time edcuation and there is no-one else. As far as I'm concerned, to quote the Council's website:

 

"The highest amount is 100 per cent of the council tax due on the property. To qualify for this you must be a full-time student and the person who has to pay the council tax and all your second adults must be receiving ... Income-based Job Seekers Allowance."

 

Now, I have been awarded a Council Tax reduction, although it doesn't say on the document what is the percentage and why this much (and why Second Adult Rebated wasn't awarded). I have calculated that the reduction is circa 41%. Even though, first - according to what the Council writes itself, I can legally claim 100% reduction, second I simply can't afford to pay £200 in November, and then £205 in December, as they ask for. With the rent, gas/electricity, and (reduced) Council Tax), I'd literally have nothing left. In fact, I'll have to sell things to buy food!

 

Any suggestions how should I persue the Council to award me the Second Adult Rebate which I'm legally entitled to?

Link to post
Share on other sites

is the student: -

  1. your partner?
  2. a joint tenant?
  3. your lodger?
  4. something else? if so can you clarify?

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

students are disregarded for CT purposes

 

this means that the student is treated as not being there for liability, discount and second adult purposes

 

you are solely liable for the CT, you would be eligible for 25% discount as only adult, but not eligible for second adult rebate

 

so therefore your CT reduction will be based upon 75% of gross charge

 

under CTB, you would have been entitled to have full assistance as you receive JSA(ib)

 

however from April this year, each LA has introduced their own scheme, so will depend on the local scheme, but 41% seems very low

 

have you tried logging in online to check the calculation?

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

just looked on their website, which indicates that CTR will be calculated on same basis as CTB for current and next financial year

 

so don't understand where you are getting 41% from?

 

were you late making your claim for CTR?

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

Well, tried to log on to 'Benefits online' today but get this: 'The 'Surname or family name' and 'PIN Number' that you have entered do not match. Please amend your entry.' Before, until a few days ago, it worked fine.

 

I have applied for both Housing Benefit and Council Tax exemption (that is - Second Adult Rebate) at the same time, in the beginning of October, filled in and printed out the application form, took it the local office and got it stamped. Received my first cheque for October in November (still waiting for the one for November), on Saturday a letter about my Council Tax status arrived. No idea why 41%, possibly an error/mistake? I had it before, as well as other people whom I knew, that the letters contained misspelled surnames, wrong information from the council given when calling them, etc. - they are understuffed so I presume do things in a hurry and this would explain a mistake (if it is).

Edited by kosebamse
Link to post
Share on other sites

it is true that a lot of councils are understaffing due to their funding cuts from central government, which is crazy when the government are creating so much extra work through their "welfare reform programme" (or should I say pogrom)

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

The CTR letter stated only the original amounts for the band the CT was calculated and the reduced amount. No explanation why this particular amount was applied. Also, it was me and the other tenant on the letter whereas, If I'm not mistaken, I should be the only one addressed since the other tenant, being in full-time education, doesn't count, right?

Link to post
Share on other sites

that is correct

 

has the other person submitted their council tax exemption certificate to the council?

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...