Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Sorry for my late update. My friends. The attchment is the charge sheet. Are you refering to this?   I find that I could also say something to the court.(See the screenshot) Can I ask for some suggestions? Charge Sheet.pdf Screenshot 2024-05-22 144200.pdf
    • do a chargeback to your bank if temu want it back then they'll write and ask for it. 9/10 they dont bother. dx
    • No reminders are required by law. As a result of that, whether the police say they sent one or not, whether they actually did so or not and whether you received it or not has no bearing on the matter whatsoever.  I have explained what to do in the third paragraph of my post #22. You don't need to do any more than that. The most likely outcome is that your offer (to plead guilty to speeding if the FtP charge is dropped) will be accepted by the prosecutor. What happens next is for the court to decide. This "deal" is done every day in courts up and down the land and all court users (prosecutors, Magistrates and their legal advisors) are familiar with it.  Although I said you could not ask to be sentenced at the fixed penalty level, that was incorrect. There is nothing to stop you asking (and if you do, you should mention it under "Mitigation" when you fill in your return). You can mention the circumstances you were in when you returned the request for driver's details and suggest that is why the error with the stamp may have occurred.  My feeling, however, is that your request will be denied. If it is, you will face sentencing under the normal guidelines. These suggest a fine of half a week's net income (reduced by a third for your guilty plea.- so one third of a week's income). You will also be ordered to pay a "Victim Surcharge" of 40% of the fine and prosecution costs of around £90. You will also have three points imposed on your driving record. You may be lucky and encounter a kindly Magistrate who settles on the fixed penalty equivalent or you may see something in between (with perhaps the prosecution costs left off). But the worst case is as in the previous paragraph. There's no need to fret too much over this. The important thing is to make sure you plead not guilty to both charges and make it absolutely clear that you will plead guilty to speeding only if the other charge is dropped. You may be asked to attend court or it may be handled under the SJ procedure. I don't know how they work this matter in South Wales.
    • The problem that I'm having is with Temu. I ordered a cat tree (£152.98) that I want to send back as it's too small for them/not as advertised/flimsy. I would never have paid that amount if I'd known what poor quality/ how small it was. I have contacted Temu about this numerous times, they did get back to me once but they didn't actually help me with their response. I tried to get in touch again but the emails only ran one way so I couldn't get back to them and tell them that they haven't answered me correctly on how to get the cat tree sent back to them. I have attached the emails correspondence into this post. Thank you in advance for the help and support.    Temu email.pdf
    • Stu007. Many thanks for your reply. They have supplied all the necessary documents so it looks like everything is above board.  Many thanks for the link, once again everything seems above board.  I have received a second claim form today as it says the one they sent me did not refer to my tenancy. Ill look at the details later   I have filled out the defence form, took pics, i will redact it later and post the pdf.  
  • 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

Rumblings about ESA WRAG Sanctions


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3577 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

Spotted this thread on rightsnet.org and it might be worth keeping an eye on it.

 

 

http://www.rightsnet.org.uk/forums/viewthread/6844/

 

 

Early days in the thread yet, but it seems, as ever that there's a great deal of floundering and confusion about referrals for repeat ESA assessments being deferred. This is the first mention I have seen anywhere about possible use of the Equality law to defend against future claims of discrimination made by sick and disabled ESA WRAG claimants who are all in the firing line for sanction.

 

 

First attempt at posting a link, hope it's approved! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be interesting to see how this pans out, as the biggest cash earner for Work Program providers is for those referred back to the DWP to be sanctioned (which is why I can't see an advisor advising of such) and then referred back to the Work Program provider. Work Program should be scrapped anyway, as the companies who provide it are a bunch of lying thieving **** (I know that they are, as I used to work for them and was shocked at what I was told).

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...