Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Between yourself and Dave you have produced a very good WS. However if you were to do a harder hitting WS it may be that VCS would be more likely to cancel prior to a hearing. The Contract . VCS [Jake Burgess?] are trying to conflate parking in a car park to driving along a road in order to defend the indefensible. It is well known that "NO Stopping " cannot form a contract as it is prohibitory. VCS know that well as they lose time and again in Court when claiming it is contractual. By mixing up parking with driving they hope to deflect from the fact trying to claim that No Stopping is contractual is tantamount to perjury. No wonder mr Burgess doesn't want to appear in Court. Conflation also disguises the fact that while parking in a car park for a period of time can be interpreted as the acceptance of the contract that is not the case while driving down a road. The Defendant was going to the airport so it is ludicrous to suggest that driving by a No Stopping  sign is tacitly accepting  the  contract -especially as no contract is even being offered. And even if a motorist did not wish to be bound by the so called contract what could they do? Forfeit their flight and still have to stop their car to turn around? Put like that the whole scenario posed by Mr Burgess that the Defendant accepted the contract by driving past the sign is absolutely absurd and indefensible. I certainly would not want to appear in Court defending that statement either. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I will do the contract itself later.
    • Yes - ignore. Because of another MET victim today I looked at all our MET cases back to June 2014 ... yes, 10 years. They have never dared take a motorist to court and argue their case before a judge.  They have started the odd court case, but as a means of trying to intimidate the motorist into coughing up, when the motorist defended and refused to give in it was MET who bottled it and discontinued.
    • Unpaid wages should be pretty straightforward if you did the work. Don't be intimidated. You need only show you were due money, and did not get money.   The risk is that they have no money to pay you (and legal fees) - frankly a solicitor maybe be costing them more than your claim is for and I might have expected them to make a commercial decision to settle before this point regardless of the merits of the case.
    • Thanks so much FTMDave.  This is so much better   I'm still tempted to leave the blue section in is as if I lose it will at least save me a little bit of money.  But I get your point that it's pretty superfluous.   Thinking I'll get this in the post on Monday unless you think it's worth delaying?   
    • Hi All I have now received a Final Reminder, which I have attached. Can you confirm that I should still ignore this letter and take no further action. It does not appear to say "Letter of Claim" anywhere on the document but I just wanted to check with you all. Many thanks FightUnfairParkingTickets Parking Charge Final Reminder issued 29th May 2024.pdf
  • 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

ESA Top Up Payment removed after becoming income based?


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3858 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

I wonder if anyone can help me. I don't know if what's happened is right.

 

I used to be on Incapacity Benefit and when I moved to ESA Contributory Benefit I got a top up payment (£11.70 a week). Now I've moved from Contributory ESA to Income Related ESA and the top up has been removed.

 

All the information I got about the top up payment (also called a Transitionary Allowance) was that you got it until the ESA was slowly increased over time, but your money stayed the same until the two met in the middle. But now it's gone.

 

The letter I got said I'm getting £100.15 a week on ESA but the page for how they calculate this says I'm getting a top up payment and I'm getting £110.85.

 

I phoned the number on the letter twice. The first time noone in the office knew if the top up payment going was correct or not but told me to assume it was. They said I should appeal but the letter says I have to have Mandatory Reconsideration first and they didn't know anything about that.

 

I phoned a local advice shop but they didn't know about the Top Up payment and I phoned the benefit people again. This time I was told going from Contributions to Income Related meant I'd had a reconsideration and it was removed because of that.

 

Is this right?

 

Nothing I can find online says going from Contributory to Income Related ESA makes you lose your Top Up payment.

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think OP and alot of other people are in the same boat and Do loose the Transition Allowance...

 

http://www.disabilityrightsuk.org/how-we-can-help/benefits-information/incapacity-benefits-migration

 

is the way I read it in the above link.

Please use the quote system, So everyone will know what your referring too, thank you ...

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your replies,

 

I still don't understand where it says that a person will lose their Top Up payment after moving to income related ESA. I can see it says:

 

"where people who are eligible for ESA receive more on existing incapacity benefits than the appropriate ESA rate, their existing rate of benefit will be frozen at the point of conversion"

 

from the link you gave: http://www.disabilityrightsuk.org/how-we-can-help/benefits-information/incapacity-benefits-migration

 

but can't see about losing the Top Up payment. Is there a bit I'm missing?

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, from what I understand, transitional allowance is only paid as part of a contributions based claim.

 

I got this from a neighbour who is in the same boat as OP .

 

The £11.70 you are talking about was part of Invalidity Allowance age related ,paid to people on IB depending on how long they had been receiving that benefit for !

 

The Transitional payment was only paid for 365 days while on ESA CB

 

Invalidity Allowance "Transitional"

HR 13.80 to 11.70

MR 7.10 to 5.90

LR 5.60 to 5.90

 

As your on ESA IR It is not paid any more.

 

I think CAG user "Starryeyes52" may be able to throw some more light on this.....

Edited by 45002

Please use the quote system, So everyone will know what your referring too, thank you ...

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

: :evil: Transitional Additions Or Lack Of :evil: :

 

Appear to be another grey area that the ComDems have kept quiet about in the rush for welfare reform that time limited, to three hundred and sixty five days, contributions flavoured employment n support allowance with the work related activity component.

 

So far as I can find, there's nothing in the Decision Makers Guide or the adviser guidance, but there's several threads on Rightsnet. Consensus of opinion seems to be that Work n Pensions procedure is;

 

There's some exceptions, but the end of contributions flavour employment n support payments often terminates a transitional addition,

 

Or, transitional protection ends anyway cos the change of income constitutes a change of circumstances,

 

Despite a pre 2012 statement that, 'The transitional addition will terminate when ESA entitlement itself terminates.'

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/245376/ib-reassessment-transitional.pdf

(Page 3)

 

 

Some claimants (who've conversion awards from incapacity benefit and income support) get two separate transitional additions. One for each flavour of employment n support allowance.

 

And yes, the £11.70 (at 2012 rates) is the highest rate age addition added to incapacity benefit (and before that it was the invalidity allowance part of invalidity benefit). Age additions and allowances from legacy benefits are the commonest reason for transitional additions to conversion awards of employment n support allowance from incapacity benefit.

 

Margaret.

Edited by **Margaret**
Link to post
Share on other sites

:Between:

 

Work n Pensions procedure seems to be that someone who claims income flavoured payments of employment n support, following three hundred and sixty five days of contribution flavoured payments, loses the transitional addition that was attached to the contributory award.

 

There's no definitive Government guidance on the internet that I know of. If anyone's found some, please share. You can read the Rightsnet discussions (click discussion then go down the ESA threads) about the issue at;

 

http://www.rightsnet.org.uk/

 

Doubt there's been a reconsideration on this. It isn't part of the transfer process. And decisions aren't reconsidered before they're notified to the claimant either!

 

Mandatory reconsideration is the first part of the new process to dispute a Work n Pensions decision made on or after 28 October 13;

 

https://www.gov.uk/appeal-benefit/decisions-made-on-after-28-october-13

 

A nonsense letter and poorly trained contact centre staff? Par for the course!

 

Best wishes, Margaret. :panda:

Edited by **Margaret**
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks everyone,

 

I really appreciate you taking the time to find out the information for me. Even though I'm losing it at least I can now know for sure that's what should be happening and it's not a mistake I have to get them to sort out.

 

I keep getting less money from things the government never publicise.

 

I had to move flat because I rent and the old one was being sold. So my housing benefit got recalculated and I got a lower amount even though my new rent was higher, because there were new rules and me moving meant a change in circumstances (even though I had no choice but move).

 

Then my housing benefit went down again earlier this year because my Top Up payment was seen as having extra money. At least I will get that amount back on my housing benefit now. At least I hope I will, I was told once that they only recalculate it once a year now.

 

I hate all the underhand ways they take money away from everyone.

 

I'm just going to concentrate on keeping getting better. I hope to be well enough to look for work in 6 months.

 

Thanks again for all your help, it's much appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

:-D

Thanks everyone,

 

I really appreciate you taking the time to find out the information for me. Even though I'm losing it at least I can now know for sure that's what should be happening and it's not a mistake I have to get them to sort out.

 

I keep getting less money from things the government never publicise.

 

I had to move flat because I rent and the old one was being sold. So my housing benefit got recalculated and I got a lower amount even though my new rent was higher, because there were new rules and me moving meant a change in circumstances (even though I had no choice but move).

 

Then my housing benefit went down again earlier this year because my Top Up payment was seen as having extra money. At least I will get that amount back on my housing benefit now. At least I hope I will, I was told once that they only recalculate it once a year now.

 

I hate all the underhand ways they take money away from everyone.

 

I'm just going to concentrate on keeping getting better. I hope to be well enough to look for work in 6 months.

 

Thanks again for all your help, it's much appreciated.

 

You could ask the council to check your HB claim again,to make sure your getting the correct amount or ask CAB/Welfare rights to check.

 

It's not the 1st time councils have been known to drop a clanger when it comes to HB claims !

 

Good luck...

1aK+F4PJ7cBm32CUNiyI2GAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC

Please use the quote system, So everyone will know what your referring too, thank you ...

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...