Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The move marks the first time the country's central bank has raised interest rates for 17 years.View the full article
    • The move marks the first time the country's central bank has raised interest rates for 17 years.View the full article
    • The firm has benefited from the AI boom, making it the third-most valuable company in the US.View the full article
    • Former billionaire Hui Ka Yan has been fined and banned from the financial market for life.View the full article
    • In terms of "why didn't I make a claim" - well, that has to be understood in the context of the long-standing legal battle and all its permuations with the shark. In essence there was a repo and probable fire sale of the leasehold property - which would have led to me initiating the complaint/ claim v SPF in summer 19. But there was no quick sale. And battle commenced and it ain't done yet 5y later. A potential sale morphed into trying to do a debt deal and then into a full blown battle heading to trial - based on the shark deliberately racking up costs just so the ceo can keep the property for himself.  Along the way they have launched claims in 4 different counties -v- me - trying to get a backdoor B. (Haven't yet succeeded) Simultaneously I got dragged into a contentious forfeiture claim and then into a lease extension debacle - both of which lasted 3y. (I have an association with the freeholders and handled all that legal stuff too) I had some (friend paid for) legal support to begin with.  But mostly I have handled every thing alone.  The sheer weight of all the different cases has been pretty overwhelming. And tedious.  I'm battling an aggressive financial shark that has investors giving them 00s of millions. They've employed teams of expensive lawyers and barristers. And also got juniors doing the boring menial tasks. And, of course, in text book style they've delayed issues on purpose and then sent 000's of docs to read at the 11th hour. Which I not only boringly did read,  but also simultaneously filed for ease of reference later - which has come in very handy in speeding up collating legal bundles and being able to find evidence quickly.  It's also how I found out the damning stuff I could use -v- them.  Bottom line - I haven't really had a moment to breath for 5y. I've had to write a statement recently. And asked a clinic for advice. One of the volunteers asked how I got into this situation.  Which prompted me to say it all started when I got bad advice from a broker. Which kick-started me in to thinking I really should look into making some kind of formal complaint -v- the broker.  Which is where I am now.  Extenuating circumstances as to why I'm complaining so late.  But hopefully still in time ??  
  • 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
      • 160 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

Government considering charging for appeals


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3669 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

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/feb/20/people-stripped-benefits-charged-decision

 

 

 

 

I remember writing a post the other day on one of the threads, and considered writing that the government could be even more obstructive and start charging for appeals - then I decided no, they wouldn't be stupid enough to even consider it, and I was wrong......

We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office ~ Aesop

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well gee, thanks Cameron & Co. Now do I get legal aid as my only source of income is suspended ?

Why not sell my kidneys to cover the cost of running your broken system.

Do you really expect me to vote for you next year ?

 

 

 

Disgusted and appalled that the idea would even be considered. However, based on previous policies introduced, not surprised.

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

They already got rid of legal aid for benefit matters - another barrier in the way of justice if there is an issue with a benefits issue - you can't get legal aid help to pay for a specialist to assist you.

We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office ~ Aesop

Link to post
Share on other sites

the tories are pure evil, once again they launch another unjustified cruel attack on the sick disabled vulnerable poor and unemployed. i really do hope it all backfires on the tories and everyone see's them for what they really are.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the tories are pure evil, once again they launch another unjustified cruel attack on the sick disabled vulnerable poor and unemployed. i really do hope it all backfires on the tories and everyone see's them for what they really are.

 

The trouble is can we say that Labour would do not likewise.

Once these ideas are out there - then they are hard to shift, especially if Cameron brings it in before the election.

 

What a cold uncaring lot they are living in their ivory towers mostly paid for by us.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's another way of reinventing the Appeals statistics, people won't be able to say 'x' number of Appeals are successful. More manipulation. They then save a good part of the £65m appeals have cost since 2000 and something.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They already got rid of legal aid for benefit matters - another barrier in the way of justice if there is an issue with a benefits issue - you can't get legal aid help to pay for a specialist to assist you.

 

I wonder why they hate us so.

It is not about the money (you heard what he said about the floods) we are a rich Country.

Why the need to persecute the sick.

I accept some people do need to get of their backsides and find work, that has long been abused, but their our many genuine people who are suffering we are not all the scroungers he paints us to be.

 

At a time when you are sick and vulnerable everything is being stripped away with nowhere to turn for help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder why they hate us so.

It is not about the money (you heard what he said about the floods) we are a rich Country.

Why the need to persecute the sick.

I accept some people do need to get of their backsides and find work, that has long been abused, but their our many genuine people who are suffering we are not all the scroungers he paints us to be.

 

At a time when you are sick and vulnerable everything is being stripped away with nowhere to turn for help.

 

It's never been about the money - as you say, we are a rich country, we have plenty of money to take care of the sick and unemployed.

 

In the end, the welfare reforms are purely ideological.

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

This is pretty much down to one person, whose been dying to do this since he was a failed leader of the Conservative party. It's easier to pick on the vulnerable then the likes of Amazon, Starbucks, Google etc. and multimillionaires.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The government is considering charging people who appeal against the decision to withdraw their benefits

 

A leaked Department for Work and Pensions document obtained by The Guardian said the “introduction of a charge for people making appeals against decisions to social security tribunals” would be one possibility of raising money.

 

The newspaper cited figures showing that nearly 900,000 people had their benefits terminated in the last year, the highest figure for any 12 month period since jobseekers allowance was brought in 18 years ago.

 

Rachel Reeves, the shadow work and pensions secretary, accused the government of presiding over a “broken” benefits system. She said that 58 per cent of appeals against DWP decisions to withdraw jobseekers allowance are upheld.

 

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/charge-people-making-appeals-against-decisions-to-withdraw-benefits-leaked-document-reveals-9142783.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

estellyn in your view is this legal?

 

it does seem instead of fixing the core issue of why people are winning tribunals they just want to simply stop people appealing.

 

 

I'm not an expert on human rights law, but I would have thought a challenge could be made under article 14 in regards to article 6. By requiring an upfront fee, the poor would be discriminated against in their access to a fair hearing at Tribunal with regards to social security law.

 

 

Though my cynical view is that this proposed policy was deliberately leaked in order to gauge public opinion - a safe way to 'test the ground'.

We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office ~ Aesop

Link to post
Share on other sites

(I remember writing a post the other day on one of the threads, and considered writing that the government could be even more obstructive and start charging for appeals - then I decided no, they wouldn't be stupid enough to even consider it, and I was wrong…..)

 

 

 

I informed our Con MP & member of the Government that the last political personage that I could recall who fell back on identifying so many scapegoats to justify political actions and cover up political mistakes was Herr. A. Hitler. I did not get a reply.

 

Now, with this proposal to charge for appeals, I start to think of benefit concentration camps (so much cheaper than housing benefits or B&B costs) but, surely, they wouldn't be stupid enough to even consider it...

Link to post
Share on other sites

(I remember writing a post the other day on one of the threads, and considered writing that the government could be even more obstructive and start charging for appeals - then I decided no, they wouldn't be stupid enough to even consider it, and I was wrong…..)

 

 

 

I informed our Con MP & member of the Government that the last political personage that I could recall who fell back on identifying so many scapegoats to justify political actions and cover up political mistakes was Herr. A. Hitler. I did not get a reply.

 

Now, with this proposal to charge for appeals, I start to think of benefit concentration camps (so much cheaper than housing benefits or B&B costs) but, surely, they wouldn't be stupid enough to even consider it...

 

 

Workhouses have already been done - no reason why they couldn't be brought back. They wouldn't be called 'workhouses' of course, maybe something like 'employment and accommodation centres'.

We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office ~ Aesop

Link to post
Share on other sites

How about dumping hostels for the sick and unemployable.

 

 

No, no, you need a name that is upbeat, positive, spinnable - regardless of the true purpose.

We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office ~ Aesop

Link to post
Share on other sites

rehabilitation and discretionary support academies

 

 

Yep, stick 'residential welfare' in front of that and I think you've got it

We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office ~ Aesop

Link to post
Share on other sites

it seems germany is ready to give the uk concessions on the eu, I wonder if one of those is human rights related.

 

Probably done a deal, we will stay within the EU if you allow us leeway on HR law.

After all if we pulled out of the EU who else would support and open the flood gates to the rest of the World.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...