Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Please can you avoid posting solid blocks of text. It is difficult for people to read especially when they are using a small screen such as a telephone. Well spaced and punctuated please. I hear what you say about the evidence – but do you have copies of it? And if so can we see it please. That's the point. We want to know what you have. As long as you have the evidence in your possession then you have some kind of control
    • Hi, the vehicle went to Audi Chingford on Thursday 13th May. I did state beforehand that I only wanted a diagnostic. The technician out of courtesy opened the drain letting huge deposits of water escape the seals. Video evidence was provided via AUDI cam. The link for the audi cam has been forwarded to BMW and Motonovo. I spoke to branch manager explained the situation and he stated he would sent me an email outlining the issue. Audi state this is not really an issue and more of a design flaw. However, the seals still have water ingress. I purchased the vehicle with £0 deposit on a 60 months HP plan for £520.00. The vehicle total was £21000. I did not go for any extended warranty. I live almost 70 miles away from the aftersales centre in Peterborough. I have previously uploaded the document I forwarded to BMW however it was in word format. I have had to buy a new tyre almost three days after purchasing vehicle. BMW still have not compensated me for the v62 cost as they said they would. 
    • I would suggest that you stop trying to rely on legal theory – as you understand it. Firstly, because we are dealing with practical/pragmatic situations and at a low value level where these arguments tend not to work. Secondly, because you clearly have misunderstood the assessment of quantum where there are breaches of obligations. The formula that you have cited above is the method of loss calculation in torts. In contract it is entirely different. The law of obligations generally attempts to remedy the breach. This means that in tort, damages seek to put you into the position you would have been in had the breach not occurred. In other words it returns you to your starting position – point zero. Contract damages attend put you into the position that you would have been had the breach not occurred but this is not your starting position, contract damages assume that the agreement in dispute had actually been carried out. This puts you into your final position. You sold an item for £XXX. Your expectation was that you your item would be correctly delivered and that you would be the beneficiary of £XXX. Your expectation loss is the amount that you sold the item for and that is all you are entitled to recover. If you want, you can try to sue for the larger sum – and we will help you. But if they ask for evidence of the value of the item as it was sold then I can almost guarantee that either you will be obliged to settle for the lesser sum – or else a judge will give you judgement but for the lesser sum. This will put you to the position that you would have been had there been no breach of contract. I understand from you now that when you dispatch the item you declared the retail cost to you and not your expected benefit of £XXX. To claim for the retail value in the circumstances would offend the rules relating to betterment. If you want to do it then we will help you – but don't be surprised if you take a tumble.  
    • I was caught speeding 3 times in the same week, on the same road. All times were 8-12mph higher than the limit. I was offered the course for the first offense and I now need to accept the other 2 offenses. I just want to be ready for what might come. Will I get the £100 fine and 3 points for each of them or do I face something more severe?  These are my only offenses in 8 years of driving.
    • I'll get my letter drafted this evening. Its an item I sold, which I'm also concerned about, as whilst I don't have my original purchase receipt (the best I have is my credit card statement showing a purchase from Car Audio Centre), I do unfortunately have the eBay listing where I sold it for much less. But as I said before this is now a question of compensation: true compensation would seek to put me back into the position I was in before the loss ie: that title would remain with me until my buyer has accepted this, and so compensation should be that which would be needed to replace the lost item. But in the world of instant electronic payment, it could be argued that as I had already been paid, the title to the goods had already transferred, and I was required to refund the buyer after the loss. And so, despite my declared value being the retail price - that which is needed to return me to my pre-sales position, the compensatory value should be the value I sold it for, which being a second-hand item from a private seller is lower. I still believe that I should be claiming for the item's full value, rather than how much I sold it for, as this is the same for insurance: we don't insure the value we paid, but rather the value of the item to put us back into the position we would be in if we ever needed to claim. Its for the loss adjuster to argue the toss
  • 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

ESA contribution based with PHI do I qualify?


Mark-s
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3593 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

I am a disabled person with a Company Permenant Health Insurance policy, premiums paid by the company . This is paid throgh my salary payslip, tax and nics taken at source. The polcy pays 70 percent of my salary with a reduction taken out to reflect any benefits I get. I was on IB and was transferred onto ESA support group back in April 2013. The problem is that I have been called in by the Fraud department of the DWP for alleged fraud with an interview under caution regrding my ESA a very frightening experience on Friday this week

. I have not committed any fraud, filled in the forms correctly ,disclosed everything and am genuinely ill and disabled I lost the use of my right hand side due to a malignant brain tumour and am still being treated. I can only think that it is something to do with my PHI. Please help,has anyone else had this problem? This is obviously very distressing.I rely on the ESA and DLA to manage, sorry for the length of this post. Please help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello and welcome to CAG, Mark-s.

 

I was in a similar position to you, I had company PHI and IB and it was fine. I'm not really up to speed on PHI and ESA, but we have people who are and I hope they will see your thread.

 

You have between now and Friday to organise your arguments and I expect the guys will help you. Please bear with us until they're able to get here, I know some are night owls.

 

I'll keep an eye on your thread. :)

 

My best, HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks HB I do hope so, as you would expect it is very upsetting to be accused of something when you have followed the rules...await all the help I can get.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Hi

I am in the process of sorting all this out. The nub of it is that I receive PHI (premiums paid by employer) via my employer, I am still employed and under contract, the likelihood of me returning to work because of my illness is slim.

 

 

There is not any clarity from DWP about claims for ESAcont, under these circumstances, there is plenty of information IF I am dead, or dismissed from my employment.I am also receiving DLA higher component.

 

 

Please, please can anyone clarify the situation for me?Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello there, I'm sorry you haven't had other replies yet.

 

Do you know if the PHI policy has an offset for the State benefits they assume you will receive? That was the case with my PHI. And if you're on contribution based [CB], commonsense would say that you can have ESA. I'd like people with more knowledge than me to comment though.

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks HB

There is an offset of state benefits % of salary less Long Term Incapacity Benefit (LTIB) at date of disability, and its is confirmed in documentation I have. The policy document is with my employer, as they pay the premiums to the insurer, the PHI provider. I do not have an updated benefit calculation from the insurer since IB has been replaced by ESA.

There is nothing in the new ESA (cont) guidelines, the assumption being that the IB rules apply. I don't want to assume anything. I have just been to my solicitor, who unfortunately is not a specialist in welfare benefits, so she had nothing to offer. I do hope someone on this forum can offer some advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this a scheme where your employer pays insurance so they can pay out sick pay to the employee? If so it shouldn't have any effect on your cont based esa, but you may need some documentation from your employer to confirm that this is what it is.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

:Mark-s:

 

You (and Jobcentreplus?) are trying to sort a problematical issue in an already technically complex benefit. Ill understood by decision makers who don't get enough training, and Jobcentreplus legal whizz kids who don't always know any better either. :censored:

 

First thing you need to clarify with the insurance company (probably via your employer) is whether the policy is income protection (sick pay) or permanent health insurance. For calculations of entitlement to employment n support, income protection is completely disregarded, which is why there's no reference to it in any guidance. Jobcentreplus have a wide definition of permanent health insurance, but they can't consider deductions from employment n support cos of it, while a claimant's still an employee.

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/decision-makers-guide-vols-8-and-9-employment-and-support-allowance-staff-guide

(Chapter 44, sections 44651 - 44723)

 

A significant number of claimants find themselves in your situation, and the incidence is higher among claimants with conversion awards. Decision makers frequently forget, or weren't told in the first place that; pre April 01 claim forms for incapacity benefit didn't ask for details of health insurance and pensions, or that they're disregarded for former recipients of incapacity benefit who're also in receipt of the highest rate care component of disability living allowance.

 

Presume you're still waiting for the outcome of your interview. Hope that what I've written gives you a starting point to defend yourself against whatever Jobcentreplus allege you've done. It may help you to know that Jobcentreplus have to prove intent to secure a conviction for fraud.

 

Best wishes, Margaret. :panda:

 

 

 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Margaret and estellyn.

It is PHI and not sick pay.Premiums paid by my employer.

I was on IB and migrated to contESA in april last year.I am in the support group because of the illness, and I have a contract with my employer for my job if I ever return.

I have read the decision makers forms, but there is no clarity in relation to my situation, I either need to be dead or my contract of employment to have ended for the pension (that is how they consider PHI) to be disregarded.

Please can you give me the specific refence.Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...