Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • FTMDave
      PARKING FINE STANTED AIRPORT MCDONALDS

      By FTMDave · Posted

      What you have uploaded is a letter with daft empty threats from third-party paper tigers.  Just ignore it. What we need to see is the original invoice you received last October or November.
    • gmlmonika
      PARKING FINE STANTED AIRPORT MCDONALDS

      By gmlmonika · Posted

      TERMINAL NOTICE.pdf
    • gmlmonika
      PARKING FINE STANTED AIRPORT MCDONALDS

      By gmlmonika · Posted

      Please find attached 
    • lookinforinfo
      NPC ANPR PCN Claimform - Taxi - Appealed - No Parking Or Waiting At Anytime - St Thomas Hospital, London, Se1 7eh.

      By lookinforinfo · Posted

      Thanks for posting the CPR contents. i do wish you hadn't blanked out the dates and times since at times they can be relevant . Can you please repost including times and dates. They say that they sent a copy of  the original  PCN that they sent to the Hirer  along with your hire agreement documents. Did you receive them and if so can you please upload the original PCN without erasing dates and times. If they did include  all the paperwork they said, then that PCN is pretty near compliant except for their error with the discount time. In the Act it isn't actually specified but to offer a discount for 14 days from the OFFENCE is a joke. the offence occurred probably a couple of months prior to you receiving your Notice to Hirer.  Also the words in parentheses n the Act have been missed off. Section 14 [5][c] (c)warn the hirer that if, after the period of 21 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice to hirer is given, the amount of unpaid parking charges referred to in the notice to keeper under paragraph 8(2)(f) or 9(2)(f) (as the case may be) has not been paid in full, the creditor will (if any applicable requirements are met) have the right to recover from the hirer so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Though it states "if any applicable ...." as opposed to "if all applicable......" in Section 8 or 9. Maybe the Site could explain what the difference between the two terms mean if there is a difference. Also on your claim form they keeper referring to you as the driver or the keeper.  You are the Hirer and only the Hirer is responsible for the charge EVEN IF THEY WEREN'T THE DRIVER. So they cannot pursue the driver and nowhere in the Hirer section of the Act is the hirer ever named as the keeper so NPC are pursuing the wrong person.  
    • FTMDave
      PARKING FINE STANTED AIRPORT MCDONALDS

      By FTMDave · Posted

      This is simply a scam site.  It's been shown to be a scam in the national press and on national TV. Please fill in the the forum sticky and upload the invoice you've received. In fact what you have is an invoice, not a fine, a private company doesn't have the power to issue fines.  

  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.

      BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld

      ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report

      WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,

      Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
      WanTToMoveOn

      Picked By

      WanTToMoveOn,

    • Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available

      BankFodder posted a post in a topic,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,
    View All

  • Recommended Topics

Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.

Unfair Notification of Customer Compliance Office Interview - Can I challenge it or request full investigation?

EmilyPink

By EmilyPink
in Benefits and HMRC

 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3812 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

EmilyPink

EmilyPink

Posted
Posted

Hi all,

 

Since the last months I have maladministration issues with my jobcentre adviser/manager and I made several complaints to JobCentre but this last has denied the fact and in return until present is doing victimisation : my JSA has been wrongly sanctioned by dwp two months ago and when I made an appeal with reliable evidences this last has just been ignore.

 

Until present, I still not even receive the JSA for hardship.

 

Yesterday, I have received a letter from the Customer Compliance Office for an interview because they suspect an alleged fraud

: I find this really insulting since they have presently put in distress and hardship but do not want to deal with my appeal fairly.

 

I strongly believe that ( like my jobcentre adviser was threating me) they are trying to equally unfairly suspend my housing benefit since this last is the only payment coming in my bank account and that I presently have a counterclaim at the court against my landlord (he instructed a tenant to harass me) and as a result I was advised by my Citizen Advice Bureau to not pay the rent at the moment (I know it is not with high standard but I presently have no choice).

 

Additionally, a month ago, I had the opportunity to make a first project on freelancer.com for my non profit organization I have just created (volunteering work) but the money (£110) came into my account since I presently have difficulty to open a non profit organisation account (bad credit score) and I had to buy a laptop for £160 for the non-profit organisation.

 

So, can I request from dwp to replace the Customer Compliance Office Interview by a higher and independent service such as the ombudsman (because I know they are just trying to sanction me unfairly)?

 

Thanks in advance for your help,

 

Emily

Link to post
Share on other sites
EmilyPink

EmilyPink

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Sounds all very muddled.

 

What claim do u have at court? When is the jearing etc

 

That was an harassment claim (jointly with another tenant). The hearing was in october and the court sent me a letter saying that they sent a request of payment to landlord solicitor (the only address I have until present) but this mail was returned to them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
jabba jones

jabba jones

Posted
Posted

So, can I request from dwp to replace the Customer Compliance Office Interview by a higher and independent service such as the ombudsman (because I know they are just trying to sanction me unfairly)?

 

Simple answer, no.

But I think you are misunderstanding the Compliance section. They cannot sanction you & will have no interest in your complaints, appeal etc etc. They probably won't even know about them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
EmilyPink

EmilyPink

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
Simple answer, no.

But I think you are misunderstanding the Compliance section. They cannot sanction you & will have no interest in your complaints, appeal etc etc. They probably won't even know about them.

 

Maybe, but they will certainly give WRONG information to dwp like seetec did two months ago in order to sanction me unfairly. May I know why you say "no" (I would just like to request to go to an interview only if an independent organisation can make full and deep investigation to the present situation).

Edited by EmilyPink
Link to post
Share on other sites
antone

antone

Posted
Posted
Maybe, but they will certainly give WRONG information to dwp like seetec did two months ago in order to sanction me unfairly. May I know why you say "no" (I would just like to request to go to an interview only if an independent organisation can make full and deep investigation to the present situation).

 

Jabba said "no" because that is the simple and straightforward answer to your question. Your compliance interview cannot be conducted by any independent ombudsman. In any case, it is completely unrelated to any sanction, appeal or formal complaint.

 

The important thing to remember when dealing with the DWP (and I can't stress this enough) is not to treat it as some sort of personal vendetta. DWP staff are not sitting around scheming and trying to come up with ways to deny EmilyPink her benefits. The staff are attempting to apply the rules. Now of course, they do make mistakes, which is why there's an appeals process, but they're not out to get you.

 

Note also that they don't really suspect fraud if the interview is with Compliance. If they seriously thought there was something dodgy going on then it would be the Fraud Investigation Service, not Compliance, that would be dealing 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
45002

45002

Posted
Posted

For reference

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?409715-JSA-Presently-sick-while-I-was-equally-sick-three-months-ago-for-two-weeks-and-presently-sanctioned

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?403760-JSA-sanction-Seetec

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

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
EmilyPink

EmilyPink

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
Jabba said "no" because that is the simple and straightforward answer to your question. Your compliance interview cannot be conducted by any independent ombudsman. In any case, it is completely unrelated to any sanction, appeal or formal complaint.

 

The important thing to remember when dealing with the DWP (and I can't stress this enough) is not to treat it as some sort of personal vendetta. DWP staff are not sitting around scheming and trying to come up with ways to deny EmilyPink her benefits. The staff are attempting to apply the rules. Now of course, they do make mistakes, which is why there's an appeals process, but they're not out to get you.

 

Note also that they don't really suspect fraud if the interview is with Compliance. If they seriously thought there was something dodgy going on then it would be the Fraud Investigation Service, not Compliance, that would be dealing with it.

 

I notified them on numerous occasion about their maladministration that they still not have corrected : so when they do their recurrent "mistake" that cause me important hardship, and try to add further request that will certainly cause me more distress I believe that it will be wiser to contact the ombudsman.

Edited by EmilyPink
Link to post
Share on other sites
EmilyPink

EmilyPink

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
err, Compliance are part of the DWP.

 

As Antone has already said Compliance are not the same as FIS (Fraud). They do not investigate. The information they obtain/request will come from YOU!

It does not matter if they are the same as FIS or not : Seetec was not part of FIS but due to the wrong information they provided I have been unfairly sanctioned and DWP decision maker unlawfully maintains this sanction after my appeal, so now it really time to contact the ombudsman (maybe my main mistake is to have contacted them earlier).

Edited by EmilyPink
Link to post
Share on other sites
antone

antone

Posted
Posted
I notified them on numerous occasion about their maladministrationthat they still not have corrected : so when they do their recurrent "mistake" that cause me important hardship, and try to add further request that will certainly cause me more distress I believe that it will be wiser to contact the ombudsman.

 

The ombudsman will not be interested - they will not conduct a Compliance interview. You would be wasting your time and theirs. If you do not attend the interview, your benefits will be stopped.

 

You can involve the Independent Case Examiner if you have exhausted the DWP complaints procedure and are still not satisfied, but this is a totally separate matter from you Compliance interview.

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
antone

antone

Posted
Posted
It does not matter if they are the same as FIS or not : Seetec was not part of FIS but due to the wrong information they provided I have been unfairly sanctioned and DWP decision maker unlawfully maintains this sanction after my appeal, so now it really time to contact the ombudsman (maybe my main mistake is to have contacted them earlier).

 

Of course it matters whether or not they are the same as FIS. Good grief. You are conflating separate issues, and if you continue to approach the problem in this way it will not end well for you.

 

If the DWP DM has refused to remove your sanction, the recourse is to appeal as you have done. Are you telling us that a Tribunal has ruled in your favour but the DWP is refusing to implement the decision?

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
EmilyPink

EmilyPink

Posted
  • Author
Posted
The ombudsman will not be interested - they will not conduct a Compliance interview. You would be wasting your time and theirs. If you do not attend the interview, your benefits will be stopped.

 

You can involve the Independent Case Examiner if you have exhausted the DWP complaints procedure and are still not satisfied, but this is a totally separate matter from you Compliance interview.

 

In what the ombudsman is interested in so?

 

PS : I will however made the complaint to them for harassment (that was what I did to dwp and they are now doing their victimisation).

Link to post
Share on other sites
antone

antone

Posted
Posted
In what the ombudsman is interested in so?

 

PS : I will however made the complaint to them for harassment (that was what I did to dwp and they are now doing their victimisation).

 

The ICE (Ombudsman) is there to help with complaints when the DWP has not been able to resolve matters to your satisfaction. It does not and cannot make decisions about whether or not a sanction should apply, and it most certainly cannot intervene in a Compliance interview.

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
EmilyPink

EmilyPink

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Of course it matters whether or not they are the same as FIS. Good grief. You are conflating separate issues, and if you continue to approach the problem in this way it will not end well for you.

 

If the DWP DM has refused to remove your sanction, the recourse is to appeal as you have done. Are you telling us that a Tribunal has ruled in your favour but the DWP is refusing to implement the decision?

 

During this time, how do you want me to live (please see the links to my others thread sent by 45002 )?

Link to post
Share on other sites
antone

antone

Posted
Posted
During this time, how do you want me to live (please see the links to my others thread sent by 45002 )?

 

I don't "want" anything - I'm just trying to persuade you not to do something pointless. There's nothing I can do to stop you.

 

Did the DWP explain why hardship is not payable?

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
EmilyPink

EmilyPink

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
The ICE (Ombudsman) is there to help with complaints when the DWP has not been able to resolve matters to your satisfaction. It does not and cannot make decisions about whether or not a sanction should apply, and it most certainly cannot intervene in a Compliance interview.

 

As previously said, I consider this "Compliance interview" as a part of harassment and way to cause me further distress since my adviser use to modify my statements in order to try to sanction me (several times wrongly put in their system that I do not live at my address anymore while I just told him that my neighbor destroy my mails,etc...).

Edited by EmilyPink
Link to post
Share on other sites
EmilyPink

EmilyPink

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
I don't "want" anything - I'm just trying to persuade you not to do something pointless. There's nothing I can do to stop you.

 

Did the DWP explain why hardship is not payable?

They asked me to provide a mini-statement at the same time than my form. But three days later, they wanted my statements for the last two months and I refused to provided them since my adviser threaten me to equally make my housing benefit stop.

Edited by EmilyPink
Link to post
Share on other sites
EmilyPink

EmilyPink

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I don't "want" anything - I'm just trying to persuade you not to do something pointless. There's nothing I can do to stop you.

 

Did the DWP explain why hardship is not payable?

 

Complaining to ombudsman for harassment and maladministration causing distress is not 'pointless'.

Link to post
Share on other sites
antone

antone

Posted
Posted
As previously said, I consider this "Compliance interview" as a part of harassment and way to cause me further distress since my adviser use to changed my statements in order to try sanction me (several times wrongly put in their system that I do not live at my address anymore while I just told him that my neighbor destroy my mails).

 

How you "consider" this interview is irrelevant. Attend or don't, your choice - I'm just letting you know what the consequences will be.

 

And you can't be "sanctioned" for not living at a particular address. Under some circumstances, you might find your payments stop until your address is updated. You can also use a correspondence address - a trusted friend or relative, perhaps?

 

If your neighbour is destroying your mail then he or she is committing a criminal offence and you should report this to the Royal Mail. If your adviser has misrepresented you then that is grounds for complaint. But it has nothing to do with the Compliance interview.

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
antone

antone

Posted
Posted
Complaining to ombudsman for harassment and maladministration causing distress is not 'pointless'.

 

No, but conflating this with your Compliance interview is pointless.

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
EmilyPink

EmilyPink

Posted
  • Author
Posted
How you "consider" this interview is irrelevant. Attend or don't, your choice - I'm just letting you know what the consequences will be.

I am not saying that I will attend not this interview : I am saying that I am looking for a way to have an independent witness when I will attend this interview (after my sickness period) and at the same time directly make a complaint to the ombudsman against jobcentre for harassment/maladministration.

Link to post
Share on other sites
antone

antone

Posted
Posted
I am not saying that I will attend not this interview : I am saying that I am looking for a way to have an independent witness when I will attend this interview (after my sickness period) and at the same time directly make a complaint to the ombudsman against jobcentre for harassment/maladministration.

 

You should be able to take a companion with you to the Compliance interview if you wish. The ICE will not take a case until you have exhausted the JCP complaints procedure and this is a totally separate matter in any case.

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
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3812 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...