Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi. Could you post up what they've sent please so we can see what the charge is? Cover up your name and address and their reference number. HB
    • I've looked through all our old NPE threads, and as far as we know they have never had the bottle to do court. There are no guarantees of course, but when it comes to put or shut up they definitely tend towards shut up. How about something like -   Dear Jonathan and Julie, Re: PCN no.XXXXX cheers for your Letter Before Claim.  I rolled around on the floor in laughter at the idea that you actually expected me to take this tripe seriously and cough up. I'll write to you not some uninterested third party, thanks all the same, because you have are the ones trying to threaten me about this non-existent "debt". Go and look up Jopson v Homeguard Services Ltd, saddos.  Oh, while you're at it, go and look up your Subject Access Request obligations - we all know how you ballsed that up way back in January to March. Dear, dear, dear - you couldn't resist adding your £70 Unicorn Food Tax, you greedy gets.  Judges don't like these made-up charges, do they? You can either drop this foolishness now or get a hell of a hammering in court.  Both are fine with me.  Summer is coming up and I would love a holiday at your expense after claiming an unreasonable costs order under CPR 27.14(2)(g). I look forward to your deafening silence.   That should show them you're not afraid of them and draw their attention to their having legal problems of their own with the SAR.  If they have any sense they'll crawl back under their stone and leave you in peace.  Over the next couple of days invest in a 2nd class stamp (all they are worth) and get a free Certificate of Posting from the post office.
    • Yes that looks fine. It is to the point. I think somewhere in the that the you might want to point out that your parcel had been delivered but clearly had been opened and resealed and the contents had been stolen
    • Hi All, I just got in from work and received a letter dated 24 April 2024. "We've sent you a Single Justice Procedure notice because you have been charged with an offence, on the Transport for London Network." "You need to tell us whether you are guilty or not guilty. This is called making your plea."
    • Okay please go through the disclosure very carefully. I suggest that you use the technique broadly in line with the advice we give on preparing your court bundle. You want to know what is there – but also very importantly you want to know what is not there. For instance, the email that they said they sent you before responding to the SAR – did you see that? Is there any trace of of the phone call that you made to the woman who didn't know anything about SAR's? On what basis was the £50 sent to you? Was it unilateral or did they offer it and you accepted it on some condition? When did they send you this £50 cheque? Have you banked it? Also, I think that we need to start understanding what you have lost here. Have you lost any money – and if so how much? Send the SAR to your bank as advised above
  • 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

sanctions


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3632 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

its disgusting ye but am i surprised? nope! as the Tory government only care about themselves and if your on benefits then its your fault and basically u should not be on them .

but if there is no work u have to get money from somewhere and reading that article^ just wants me even more to get them out of government and get labour or something in as i have never liked Tory and never will they are the worst people to ever step foot in to politics !

 

anymore article like this should be uploaded for everyone to see!

Link to post
Share on other sites

How many are real jobs

How many are self employed

How many are part time

How many are scams

How many are zero hours

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

 

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone has kindly been data scraping on your behalf - Download the file and produce your own statistics from http://universalautomation.tumblr.com/post/81483423029/collect-and-analyse-large-numbers-of-jobs-from.

 

In all probability, the number of genuine jobs are a lot less than the touted 600,000.

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

The article states there are 600,000 vacancies. How many of those vacancies are full time jobs, that will last more than 12 months?

 

when i heard this from dwp 600,000 vacancies that is the most crap i have ever heard and who ever they have in charge of these crap stats are seriously drunk as am sure most are fakes most are the same jobs on the same websites and others are just not really at all.

 

if there was "600,000" jobs then i think the total of the unemployed would be far lower than it is! so they can stop giving us lies after lies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The number of sanctions imposed on jobseeker's allowance (JSA) claimants rose to 227,629 in the last three months of 2013, an increase of 69,600 on the equivalent quarter in 2012.

In total, 870,793 claimants were subject to an adverse decision to lose their benefit in 2013 because of a failure to meet Jobcentre Plus requirements to make themselves available for work.

In October alone, there were 88,489 adverse decisions, a record number of sanctions for a single month since the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) started compiling the figures.

 

 

The figures released on Wednesday alongside the labour market statistics also show that an additional 530,957 JSA claimants were referred for a sanction in 2013,

 

 

this is shocking! the dwp etc have a cheek to say sanctions are "LAST RESORT" but yet u look at them figures and u think really?

 

 

 

People who are in a job know that if they don't play by the rules or fail to turn up in the morning, there might be consequences, so it's only right that people on benefits should have similar responsibilities.

 

 

people in work get warnings so how come when you sign on u never get a warning u get sanctioned straight away?

 

 

and i know u get warnings in work as the job i did have 2-3 them done something and got warnings but yet if u do one mistakes u lose your benefit for 4-13 weeks and so on its a joke!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole system is a farce and is set up to fail the vulnerable and weak which is why you need to be on your toes at all times - do not give them ANY excuse to raise a sanction against you. If you know you have done nothing wrong then you cannot be sanctioned.

 

When I saw my signing on adviser today before my INGECRAP appointment I asked him about sanction targets - he said they do not exist but with a wry smile on his face - obviously he wasn't going to fully admit there were targets to a claimant but he knew I knew they were in place. He did say something I agreed with though and that was that some people do not help themselves and gave me an example. He simply said someone needs to see him once a fortnight for 5 minutes and if they cannot manage that and miss appointments then there is nothing he can do. He also said he obviously knew people don't actively look for work but also said if you are going to not bother at least turn up with something on a sheet of paper - he said people miss appointments or turn up with nothing and wonder why they have a sanction placed against them.

 

It was mentioned above and I agree, in work unless it is gross misconduct you are likely to get a warning before disciplinary action so why are sanctions raised immediately if there may be a genuine reason for missing an appointment and unable to call immediately? Say you are en route to the JCP to sign on and get hit by a car and an ambulance takes you tohospital - sanction? You cannot call straight away can you and it is not your fault. I could go on but we all know the system is flawed and unfair and the reason the genuine JSA claimants are penalised is because of the small % of unemployable, unwilling, lazy claimants that make workers tar us all with the same brush

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thankfully I am close to departing the system after a short stay on it and I have to say

Thank god

 

When I started using the JC after voluntarily coming of ESA I *asked* for help updating my CV,

Ive been lucky in that for 11 years with the same employer, bar the promotion inter view process that I never had to job hunt. I had always been employed form the age of 14 as a paperboy and changed jobs seamlessly until I took ill and had to leave my long term job after winning a tribunal process.

 

Other than the help updating my cv, they have not helped. I have asked for help doing various things but thankfully my advisor seems to be one of the reasonable ones. I have till recently been allowed to just get on with it. I think it helps that I have several jobs applied for and the full paper and email trails for each job printed out and with me when I go to sign on so I try to make myself a non target.

 

Thankfully Ive now passed all the formal processes for a job, passed the medical and just waiting on my Driving license to be updated from DLA and then I get my start date. Until then though for the next 3-4 weeks at least I still have to waste employers time applying for jobs that I will not be interested on once I get my start date. I think in cases such as this it undermines the system.

 

Employers don't trust the system as it encourages applications from the wrong people who have no intention of taking the job

Employees of companies are afraid of the welfare system and put up with unacceptable behavior at work afraid they might get fed to the DWP grinder if they raise a complaint and lose their job,

Unemployed people who generally want to work despise the system as it does not help them and also they get picked on for stupid things and sometimes its even the system thats made the fault.

 

UJM is discredited

The Sanctions process misses those who genuinely need to be sanctioned and hits the "weaker mnore vulnerable claimants"

The work programs are just a group of fat cats lining their pockets.

 

Whole system needs burning and starting again. I for one could design a more comprehensive system and get better outcomes. First of all change the sanction regime. EG If you get a sanction then it gets *stayed* until the claimant exhausts the appeals process or accepts the sanction.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

 

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whole system needs burning and starting again. I for one could design a more comprehensive system and get better outcomes. First of all change the sanction regime. EG If you get a sanction then it gets *stayed* until the claimant exhausts the appeals process or accepts the sanction.

 

That's exactly how it used to work - you were told nothing by the JC, but received a letter saying 'A doubt has arisen, etc'. Your money was not stopped yet. There was a space on the back of the form for you to write your side of it and send it back. Your money was not stopped while you did this. After your side had been looked at (and they decided they were going to sanction you), you got a letter back telling you the doubt had been upheld and that you would lose money from x date to Y date. Your money was not instantly stopped though, the dates were at least a couple of weeks in the future, to give you time to save a little and start a claim for hardship. After these couple of weeks, THEN your money was stopped. At least you were given formal notification and a little time to prepare.

 

Now, the first thing you know you've been sanctioned is when you check your account and find money missing. You're not even informed you have been sanctioned. It's disgraceful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole system is a farce and is set up to fail the vulnerable and weak which is why you need to be on your toes at all times - do not give them ANY excuse to raise a sanction against you. If you know you have done nothing wrong then you cannot be sanctioned.

 

When I saw my signing on adviser today before my INGECRAP appointment I asked him about sanction targets - he said they do not exist but with a wry smile on his face - obviously he wasn't going to fully admit there were targets to a claimant but he knew I knew they were in place. He did say something I agreed with though and that was that some people do not help themselves and gave me an example. He simply said someone needs to see him once a fortnight for 5 minutes and if they cannot manage that and miss appointments then there is nothing he can do. He also said he obviously knew people don't actively look for work but also said if you are going to not bother at least turn up with something on a sheet of paper - he said people miss appointments or turn up with nothing and wonder why they have a sanction placed against them.

 

It was mentioned above and I agree, in work unless it is gross misconduct you are likely to get a warning before disciplinary action so why are sanctions raised immediately if there may be a genuine reason for missing an appointment and unable to call immediately? Say you are en route to the JCP to sign on and get hit by a car and an ambulance takes you tohospital - sanction? You cannot call straight away can you and it is not your fault. I could go on but we all know the system is flawed and unfair and the reason the genuine JSA claimants are penalised is because of the small % of unemployable, unwilling, lazy claimants that make workers tar us all with the same brush

 

ye did not think they admit they do it!

 

at least someone agrees in work u get WARNINGS so if your late 2 seconds its a 4 week sanction a would like them to tell me how that works because signing on is not the same as work if u get sanctions and dont get a warning for your first time and yet in work u get warnings and then u will be dealt with if u do something again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the subject of sanctions, it is interesting to note how the system here in N Ireland differs from the one in Great Britain. If you are issued with a sanction over here and you then carry out the directive, the sanction ends immediately. None of this bollocks of 2/4 weeks being left without money. Admittedly, we have not had the welfare reforms implemented over here yet, due to opposition from the Stormont government. Will be keeping note to see if we end up with the same sanctions regime as GB, when the reforms are finally introduced over here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To me its became quite clear this current government are intent on getting the results they want (which is less on benefits) by any means necessary. They have probably worked out as long as it cannot be proven and challenged legally they will be fine, and even then it would take someone else to make new legislation to reverse the policies. Far too many whstleblower/leaks going on as well as claimant reports to suggest otherwise.

 

All they have done since getting power is basically aggressively hit benefit claimants to cause hardship, cut taxes for the rich and large corporations and found a way for companies to bypass the min wage laws. With exception to that the only good policy I see is the tax threshold increase for low earners (which came from the lib dems). It's clear who they work for yet the mainstream press and public are blind to it, they been brainwashed to think an entire worldwide recession and taxes are all down to the unemployed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...