Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Housing Benefit & Special Guardianship Allowance


kjm
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3679 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

Hi.

Me and my husband have been caring for my nephew for over 5 years.

We claim housing benefit & when my nephew first came to live with us we obviously declared the family & friends allowance we were recieving to the housing benefit department which has always shown as 'charitable payments' on our decision notices.

In oct 2011 we were granted a special guardianship order for him & the allowance changed from family & friends to sgo allowance.

Information I came across last week has led me to believe that the council shouldn't be using the sgo allowance as income when working out our benefit, yet they are & always have.

I called the department & I was told that that wasn't right & if it is on our benefit decision notice then I'm wrong as they have departments that check for these things.

I asked if they had the allowance down as family & friends or sgo & the woman said that she couldn't tell & that it didn't matter either way.

I told her that the government webite says otherwise (from 2011 onwards) & so does the fostering & adoption team website for our area.

She said that the government are always changing it & it must have changed again recently.

I've had to give up work to meet my nephews needs (& we also have two other children). My husband works full time but every month is a struggle.

I don't know where we stand now. Who's right? Does it differ from council to council?

Can anyone here offer any advice?

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi.

Me and my husband have been caring for my nephew for over 5 years.

We claim housing benefit & when my nephew first came to live with us we obviously declared the family & friends allowance we were recieving to the housing benefit department which has always shown as 'charitable payments' on our decision notices.

In oct 2011 we were granted a special guardianship order for him & the allowance changed from family & friends to sgo allowance.

Information I came across last week has led me to believe that the council shouldn't be using the sgo allowance as income when working out our benefit, yet they are & always have.

I called the department & I was told that that wasn't right & if it is on our benefit decision notice then I'm wrong as they have departments that check for these things.

I asked if they had the allowance down as family & friends or sgo & the woman said that she couldn't tell & that it didn't matter either way.

I told her that the government webite says otherwise (from 2011 onwards) & so does the fostering & adoption team website for our area.

She said that the government are always changing it & it must have changed again recently.

I've had to give up work to meet my nephews needs (& we also have two other children). My husband works full time but every month is a struggle.

I don't know where we stand now. Who's right? Does it differ from council to council?

Can anyone here offer any advice?

Thanks

 

 

Request a review of the decision in writing, and it will go to a more senior decision maker to look at.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...