Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Should this to be take into court with him or should he send something in earlier?
    • This is the other sign  parking sign 1a.pdf
    • 4 means that they need to name and then tell the people who will be affected that there has been an application made, what the application relates to (specificially "whether it relates to the exercise of the court’s jurisdiction in relation to P’s property and affairs, or P’s personal welfare, or to both) and what this application contains (i.e what order they want made as a result of it) 5 just means that teh court think it is important that the relevant people are notified 7 means that the court need more information to make the application, hence they have then made the order of paragraph 1 which requires the applicant to do more - this means the court can't make a decision with the current information, and need more, hence paragraph one of the order is for the applicant to do more. paragraph 3 of the order gives you the ability to have it set aside, although if it was made in january you are very late. Were you notiifed of the application or not?    
    • These are the photos of the signs. At the entrance there is a 7h free sign. On some bays there is a permit sign.  Also their official website is misleading as it implies all parking is free.  I can't be certain of the exact parking bay I was in that day, and there was no PCN ticket on my car and no other evidence was provided.  parking sign 2.pdf
    • Hi, In my last post I mentioned I had received an email from SS who were asking me to hand over the keys to my mother’s flat so they could pass them to the Law firm who have been appointed court of protection to access, secure and insure my mother’s property.  Feeling this, all quickly getting out of my hands I emailed ss requesting proof of this. I HAVEN’T HEARD BACK FROM SS.  Yesterday, I received an email (with attached court of protection order) from the Law Firm confirming this was correct (please see below a copy of this).  After reading the court of protection order I do have some concerns about it:   (a)   I only found out yesterday, the Law firm had been appointed by the court back in January.  Up until now, I have not received any notification regarding this.  (b)   Section 2   - States I am estranged from my mother.  This is NOT CORRECT    The only reason I stepped back from my mother was to protect myself from the guy (groomer) who had befriended her & was very aggressive towards me & because of my mother’s dementia she had become aggressive also.  I constantly tried to warned SS about this guy's manipulative behaviour towards my mother and his increasing aggressiveness towards me (as mentioned in previous posts).  Each time I was ignored.  Instead, SS encouraged his involvement with my mother – including him in her care plans and mental health assessments.   I was literally pushed out because I feared him and my mother’s increasing aggression towards me. Up until I stepped back, I had always looked after my mother and since her admission to the care home, I visit regularly.   .(c)    Sections -  4, 5 and 7  I am struggling to understand these as I don’t have a legal background.  I was wondering if there is anyone who might be able to explain what they mean.  It’s been a horrendous situation where I had to walk away from my mother at her most vulnerable because of; ss (not helping), scammer and groomer. I have no legal background, nor experience in highly manipulative people or an understanding of how the SS system operates, finding myself isolated, scared and powerless to the point I haven’t collected my personal belongings and items for my mother’s room in the care home.  Sadly, the court has only had heard one version of this story SS’s, and based their decision on that. My mother’s situation and the experience I have gone through could happen to anyone who has a vulnerable parent.    If anyone any thoughts on this much appreciated.  Thank you. ______________________________________________________  (Below is the Court of Protection Order)  COURT OF PROTECTION                                                                                                                                                                                   No xxx  MENTAL CAPACITY ACT 2005 In the matter of Name xxx ORDER Made by  Depty District Judge At xxx Made on xxx Issued on 18 January 2024  WHEREAS  1.     xxx Solicitors, Address xxx  ("Applicant”) has applied for an order under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.  2.     The Court notes (my mother) is said to be estranged from all her three children and only one, (me) has been notified.  3.     (Me) was previously appointed as Atorney for Property and Affairs for (my mother).  The Exhibity NAJ at (date) refers to (me) and all replacement Attorneys are now officially standing down.  4.     Pursuant to Rule 9.10 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 and Practice Direction 9B the Applicant 2must seek to identify at least three persons who are likely to have an interest in being notified that an application has been issues.”  The children of (my mother), and any other appointed attorneys are likely to have an interest in the application, because of the nature of relationship to (my mother).  5.     The Court considers that the notification requirements are an important safeguard for the person in respect of whom an order is sought.  6.     The Court notes that it is said that the local authority no longer has access to (my mother’s) Property.  7.     Further information is required for the Court to determine the application.  IT IS ORDERED THAT  Within 28 days of the issue date this order, the Applicant shall file a form COP24 witness statement confirming that the other children of (my mother) and any replacement attorneys have been notified of the application and shall confirm their name, address, and date upon which those persons were notified.  If the Applicant wishes the Court to dispense with any further notification, they should file a COP9 and COP24 explaining, what steps (if any) have been taken to attempt notification and why notification should be dispensed with.   Pending the determination of the application to appoint a deputy for (my mother), the Applicant is authorised to take such steps as are proportionate and necessary to access, secure and insure the house and property of (my mother).   This order was made without a hearing and without notice.  Any person affected by this order may apply within 21 days of the date on which the order was served to have the order set aside or varied pursuant to Rule 13.4 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 (“the Rules”).  Such application must be made on Form COP9 and in accordance with Part 10 Rules.              
  • 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 
        • 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

Money Advice Service 'not fit for purpose'


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3774 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

The service that is supposed to help those experiencing financial problems is "not fit for purpose", according to MPs.

 

In a hard-hitting report into the Money Advice Service (MAS) published today, the Treasury Select Committee said it had wanted to scrap the service completely but had been persuaded to grant a stay of execution because the Treasury has already announced an investigation.

 

The report condemns the "excessive pay" of senior staff and the amount of cash used to promote the service rather than help vulnerable people. The committee has called for an urgent review into the service, which has an annual budget for 2013-14 of £80m.

 

In a telling sign of the importance of the issue, it has demanded the review must be completed "no later than summer 2014".

 

The damning report criticised the "very large amounts spent on marketing" by the Government agency, which was set up to help people needing debt and financial guidance.

 

It splashed out about £20m on communications and marketing in 2012-13, including some high-profile TV advertising.

 

However, critics said the predominantly web-based service failed to help people, many of whom needed face-to-face advice.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/mps-condemn-money-advice-service-as-not-fit-for-purpose-8978820.html

 

http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/treasury-committee/news/treasury-committee-calls-for-independent-review-into-future-of-the-money-advice-service/

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

The Fat Cats at it again...even to the detrement of struggling families:-(

We could do with some help from you.

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

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Has the MAS ever been fit for purpose? The CFS is useful, but not much else is. Their self managed DMP CashFlow has been a total flop with very few signing up for it.

 

I wonder if they'll plan to do anything which thinks more 'outside the box' in order to ensure their survival?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

Hot topic now the MAS, interesting article today from Credit 'Today'

 

http://www.credittoday.co.uk/article/16334/online-news/money-advice-provision-moving-in-right-direction

 

The spotlight will continue to be on the MAS & other agencies, now and into the new year

 

Pressure to deliver will increase in these fascinating times for the debt advice sector

 

Something is cooking

 

My opinions

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

 

Treasury Report on the MAS

 

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201314/cmselect/cmtreasy/457/45702.htm

 

Another interesting article with both sides of the debate 'slugged' out a little so to speak

 

http://m.moneymarketing.co.uk/2003913.article?mobilesite=enabled

 

Nice to see that there is plenty of Christmas spirit around, maybe they will save what they really want to say and mean to each other for the New Year:)

 

W

Edited by Wintry
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's difficult really to see WHY it should continue IMO. So much of what it does is duplicated elsewhere, though I'm not sure the CAB is the right body for all its functions to be given, as for some it could make a direct conflict of interest in the CAB's functions.

 

As you say, interesting times ahead.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's difficult really to see WHY it should continue IMO. So much of what it does is duplicated elsewhere, though I'm not sure the CAB is the right body for all its functions to be given, as for some it could make a direct conflict of interest in the CAB's functions.

 

As you say, interesting times ahead.

 

Hi

 

I can see the MAS coming under sustained fire in the new year, Stalins daughters & all

 

I think they will survive however as there is simply not enough time to start again with another re-launch agency... is there???

 

There will be changes and developments no doubt and lets hope the people who need the advice and help benefit as that is what this is supposed to be all about.

 

My opinions

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do we need a re-launch agency? Which bits of the MAT would you be wanting to keep if you were in control?

 

 

Hi

 

Interesting questions:)

 

No, we don't need a re-launch agency, there isn't time really, just some good thinkers and experienced people with a few new ideas will do the trick.

 

More co-ordinated genuine free independent impartial face to face advisers on benefits, budgeting, debt & housing especially (these areas overlap in debt advice) & network inter agency support, backed up with telephone and digital.

 

All the above made easier to access and taken into the communities, other agencies & education

 

The marketing & advertising have been highlighted already, not rocket science to see this area was a little top loaded cost wise so to speak.

 

I think we will see a few changes for the better in the new year, some good stuff in the pipeline so I hear

 

You wont get anything else out of me sir:) :) - not yet anyway:)

 

PS - I assume you are talking about the MAS and not the MAT? - the MAT should agree with me really you would hope, but then again maybe not on everything.

 

My take

Edited by Wintry
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

Shhhhh

 

The MAT people on here might be watching my every post:

 

Cant think why:)

 

Just my humour

 

I would imagine the MAT people would agree with much of what you say :)

 

Oh, and I still haven't a clue what the MAS is supposed to do? And I've met the folks from there a few times now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would imagine the MAT people would agree with much of what you say :)

 

Oh, and I still haven't a clue what the MAS is supposed to do? And I've met the folks from there a few times now.

 

Hi

 

Did you ask them?

 

Did you make any suggestions as to what they are supposed to do?

 

Just curious:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

Did you ask them?

 

Did you make any suggestions as to what they are supposed to do?

 

Just curious:)

 

I understand that they are more than aware of the errors of their ways. Whether or not it can all be fixed is a different story. Personally, like you say, that money could have been better spent funding the coordinated approach that was already in place (ish). Greater funding for front line advisers and investment in a centralised process to ensure people get the type of help they need. There is already a coordinated process of sorts in place between CABx and NDL, and that is working well (though it's a real shame that many CAB branches do not have direct lines for the public - but, of course, I totally understand whay they don't!

 

I think the MAS, like Money Made Clear before it are massive white elephants and a complete waste of tax payers' money.

 

If I had my way I would be funding more f2f advisers to help with rent/mortgage repossessions because it's going to be a massive area in a year or twos time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand that they are more than aware of the errors of their ways. Whether or not it can all be fixed is a different story. Personally, like you say, that money could have been better spent funding the coordinated approach that was already in place (ish). Greater funding for front line advisers and investment in a centralised process to ensure people get the type of help they need. There is already a coordinated process of sorts in place between CABx and NDL, and that is working well (though it's a real shame that many CAB branches do not have direct lines for the public - but, of course, I totally understand whay they don't!

 

I think the MAS, like Money Made Clear before it are massive white elephants and a complete waste of tax payers' money.

 

If I had my way I would be funding more f2f advisers to help with rent/mortgage repossessions because it's going to be a massive area in a year or twos time.

 

 

Hi

 

Yes, some good stuff here that I have to agree with to a certain extent.

 

Mortgage & rent arrears are already a busy area and have been for years to be honest, I have to agree that they will get worse as many people are living on the limit or below.

 

There is only so much you can do with telephone advice, it has to be a combined approach with support for the vulnerable.

 

Debt advice is not just about spending the majority of time getting people into solutions such as DMPs & IVAs and perhaps on occasions trying to keep them in such payment arrangements when maybe other options and solutions may be more appropriate or at least worth discussion and consideration (this perhaps is more so than ever given the economic climate and the crunch in peoples disposable incomes)

 

Priority debts need dealing with including negotiation and support (we are seeing more and more people getting into trouble with priorities including people currently in DMPs & IVAs)

 

Advice and support with housing, benefits, budgeting and other associated issues go hand in hand with debt advice.

 

The above two areas can be the most demanding and time consuming not to mention the most important, the trouble is that these areas don't really generate income and profit.

 

According to some of the figures I see it appears that the vast majority of people seeking debt advice cannot really be helped by the fee chargers and telephone agencies and on occasions are referred elswhere to agencies like the CAB)

 

A combined approach is needed and the tools to genuinely help themselves with support if necessary and possible.

 

The sheer scale of debt problems means there is no magic wand solution, but there has to be a move in the right direction and change with the times.

 

Of course the key is genuine independent impartial advice in the best interests of those in debt, well there is another story and debate

 

My take

Edited by Wintry
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Of course the key is genuine independent impartial advice in the best interests of those in debt, well there is another story and debate

 

 

Absolutely agree. And as far as I'm concerned there are only two major organisations that provide this. I've mystery shopped most agencies/firms - and the difference in advice between the best and worst is shocking. Interesting to see Stepchange's new approach with priority debts and DMPs, I wonder how that will pan out.

 

According to some of the figures I see it appears that the vast majority of people seeking debt advice cannot really be helped by the fee chargers and telephone agencies and on occasions are referred elswhere to agencies like the CAB)

 

There is certainly a large portion of people that require a caseworker - certainly those with overly complex cases and those that a vulnerable for whatever reason. I think many people, though, can easily cope with telephone advice - so long as they are getting holistic advice about the whole situation and not just some service aimed at getting a DMP/IVA set up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with all the above, but I think also that people need time. No two people have exactly the same problem and the joy for me of being small is being able to spend time really getting to know clients. I guess that larger organisations just don't have this luxury. It is incredibly frustrating to see people being channelled into a particular 'solution' - those days should really be long gone, but aren't.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone who was and is in a large amount of debt I felt that initially when it came to getting help I needed more than a telephone. I am not (contrary to some opinion) unintelligent but i ended going with a fee payer. I have to say the fact i knew the person was an advantage.

When i was looking at BR i went to my local CAB and it was a 2 week wait to see anyone and another 6 to see a money advisor.

I am not sure what MAS really does but it is confusing to Jo public to have MAS and MAT. Surely both roles could be done by one agency with a massive cost saving. I am aware MAT is a charity whereas MAS is a government agency.

There is a definite need for both telephone and face to face advice. Just looking at some posts on here demonstrate that. People need help with formulating defences etc. One poster was told by his debt advisor to just take the ccj, no why's or wherefore

Any opinion I give is from personal experience .

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not sure what MAS really does but it is confusing to Jo public to have MAS and MAT. Surely both roles could be done by one agency with a massive cost saving.

 

They do two completely different roles with little overlap. it's frustrating that MAS decided to call themselves that as there is often lots of confusion.

 

 

There is a definite need for both telephone and face to face advice. Just looking at some posts on here demonstrate that. People need help with formulating defences etc. One poster was told by his debt advisor to just take the ccj, no why's or wherefore

 

Few CABs will get involved with helping with legal defences, people generally need qualified legal advice for that. Some CABs do have close links to law centres (Derby and Coventry are both good examples of this. There are also people internal to the CAB that are very clever - the specialist support team is incredible (they taught me much of what I know).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi my friends:)

 

I like this thread, some really good stuff today:)

 

It is (or should be) about getting the best and most appropriate advice and result in the best interests of those in debt or seeking debt advice.

 

Profit & income dependent agencies and companies, can they ever be really independent and impartial?

 

I have heard the term re-habilitate those in debt by going down the DMP & IVA route or punitive is another term I have read.

 

The above is totally contradictory if we are talking about independent impartial advice in my opinion and is arguably just a marketing strategy to make money out of people.

 

Debt advice is not just about selling people Debt Management Plans and IVAs it never has been and it never will be.

 

There we are, a 'wintry' blast from the old bouts of years gone by and gritty exchanges at a very recent high profile debt & money conference

 

We love each other really

 

My take:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

They do two completely different roles with little overlap. it's frustrating that MAS decided to call themselves that as there is often lots of confusion.

 

 

 

 

Few CABs will get involved with helping with legal defences, people generally need qualified legal advice for that. Some CABs do have close links to law centres (Derby and Coventry are both good examples of this. There are also people internal to the CAB that are very clever - the specialist support team is incredible (they taught me much of what I know).

 

 

Hi

 

There are around 300 CABs in England & Wales, independent branches

 

Links with other specialist agencies and advisers is quite common and vice versa

 

 

W

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

There are around 300 CABs in England & Wales, independent branches

 

Links with other specialist agencies and advisers is quite common and vice versa

 

 

W

 

Oh, I know. I've visited several. I have a huge amount of respect for the work they do. My point, though, was specifically around help with defending claims etc. The problem we're seeing is the squeeze on free legal help - many law centres are having to close, my local one went not long ago. It's incredibly sad.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...