Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yes, I will, I have a million bookmarks and I will post it here as soon as I find it. EDIT: Here we go, took less time than I thought it would:
    • Could you link us to BankFodder's post please? The judge's office means something different to me. HB
    • Hi LFI, With regard to the ANPR cameras in your post #65, while I was on the phone to the Planning Department, they did take a look at Google Streetview and went back to 2012 where they could see the ANPR cameras in place so therefore they would have deemed consent. I had previously read the T&C Planning Regulations and had read the section on deemed consent so I understood the point they made on the phone. It doesn't matter though, that doesn't harm my case any, and I shouldn't really mention this now, (this is what you reminded me of on another thread) but in the past I was a member of a scheme that gave me access to legal advice, I have spoken to a barrister previously through this scheme on another matter and I think I am still a member. I am going to check if I am still a member of the scheme, and if I am I will discuss my case with a barrister or solicitor, whichever the scheme deems appropriate. I will let you know the outcome. I am also going to take Bankfodders advice in the sticky and go to the local court and ask if I can sit in on a case in the Judges office.
    • deed?  you mean consent order you and her signed? concluding the case as long as you nor she break it's conditions signed upto? dx Yes sorry. they called it a deed at first in court.  Then Judge said she was happy to have it sealed as something else  exact names of orders in message above.     The disease was tested for when his cardiac testing was done immediately after purchase and part of the now sealed case.   However, results were disclosed incorrectly and I only found out  two days ago.   This disease did not form part of my knowledge during the case as I had been informed of a normal result that was not the case.   it is perfect clarity of a genetic disease where as the previous cardiac issue could be congenital until the pup is genetically tested. 
    • Hi, Halifax recently sold a credit card account of mine to Cabot. I am unemployed and have no assets and was thinking of making token £1 payments for 12-18 months in order to drag things out a bit and reduce the chance of Cabot being able to get the correct CCA documents from Halifax if I requested them in future. However, I saw on the pages on this forum about defending county court claims that one of the standard approaches when defending such claims is to say “I had an account with bank X, but I don’t remember the details and so don’t know if I owe this debt…”. If I made £1 payments to Cabot, would it prevent me from using such a defence in future? OC: Halifax DC: Cabot/Wescot Card account opened: 2016 Defaulted: 2023
  • 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

Work Programme


jamesharris343
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3732 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

Just a reminder to us good folks to stay on our toes as we start a new year dealing with the Jobcentre. No doubt they will have been told to be even less tolerant and be looking harder for sanctionable errors on our part. One thing we can be sure of; it won't get any better!

 

I had my first signing of the new year today with one of the more miserable advisors and upon confirming I hadn't granted access to UJ, was asked 'Why would you not want us to see your account?' - which to me was a veiled accusation of my not using it. I quoted the legislation and said it was not up for any kind of discussion; I haven't given permission and that's the end of it and any further questions of that kind would result in a complaint of harrassment.

 

Some advisers seem determined that you will give them access AND store all your jobsearch on UJ - maybe this is the new tactic for the year.

 

Start as you mean to go on and don't take any rubbish off them!

Link to post
Share on other sites

An FOI response dated yesterday on the Whatdotheyknow site about the DWP & WP contacting employers to validate your employment details. Extract;

 

'The existence of a legal power to share relevant data means there is no need for an

individual's consent to be obtained in order for the sharing to take place. A former benefit

claimant cannot stop the Jobcentre, DWP or its Provider Payment Validation Team from

contacting employers about the individual’s employment for the purposes specified in the

order.

The Designation Order applies to claimants of the following benefits; Employment Support

Allowance, Jobseekers Allowance, Incapacity Benefit /Income Support and Universal Credit.

 

To clarify, neither the Department nor Work Programme providers need to obtain claimant

consent to contact employers or future employers for these benefit claimants. However, the

Department does not insist that the Work Programme provider’s use the powers granted them

through the Designation Order, so if a provider still wanted to obtain claimant consent they

could do so.'

 

Finally, the Designation Order fully complies with the Data Protection Act which both the

Department and Work Programme providers have to adhere to.

 

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/work_programme_providers_and_out#incoming-469293

Edited by jasta11
Link to post
Share on other sites

To clarify, neither the Department nor Work Programme providers need to obtain claimant

consent to contact employers or future employers for these benefit claimants.

 

A point often overlooked is that Work Programme "advisers" have been granted powers by the Secretary of State that give them the same authority as DWP/JCP staff - Bad move on his part, and bad news for claimants.

As to this amendment to the Welfare Reform act, it was bound to happen as increased numbers of WP participants refused permission to contact employers. The only way round this is to refuse to provide any information when signing off. The DWP conveniently provide a box on the form that asks for "any other reason for closing a claim" if employer details are not filled in - A simple "personal reasons" is sufficient.

 

In time, the Secretary of State will go back to Parliament and ask for legislation that allows data to be shared with HMRC, local councils, DWP, and any other Tom Dick & Harry.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

No... you can't eat my brain just yet. I need it a little while longer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
I would also add to use your smartphone and show the adviser

 

NEVER show your advisor you have a mobile phone, as they will ask you for the number and then pester you with calls days in day out!

My advisor thinks i dont have a phone, i told him in our first meeting when he asked. i couldn't afford to run one, and my landline was the only name he was having.

 

A friend of mine gave his mobile number, and gets calls from them every day..

 

Normally on the lines of Hi Daniel, have you applied for such and such a job? ive told him to block the number, and tell his advisor he cant afford to run it anymore.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...