Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 1. who knows... 2. not the whole A/C vanishes from your file on the DN's 6th b'day ...already carefully explain this. 3.yes 4.already carefully explain this.
    • if i remember rightly, long ago in one of the first drafts of the old proposed gov't overhauls, there was a listing of recommended 'charges' that inc wrong reg = £20. some PPC's implemented such changes in advance. then later as it looked increasing likely the new code was never going to be implemented after it's 1st review and another set of codes was to be debated they all quietly revert back .......... dx
    • Potentially it may not even get sold on? Just the default left for 6 years then gone? but if it is sold on ill get a letter from the DCA which is the notice of assignment? Sorry what is the different between a default notice and a default cal marker? yes, i may try and work arrangements out with the OCs after the breathing space but I'll see my circumstances then thank you again for all your help and patience, I really appreciate it and apologies If i am too fast or repeating myself.
    • receiving a default NOTICE (forget simple default cal markers) does not mean it will get sold on... OC's very very rarely do court themselves.  if it does you would receive a Notice of Assignment from the debt buyer/DCA.  as for reduced payment if it remains with the OC and they issue a DN, no harm in trying but lets get all your ducks inline first. dx  
    • okay thanks do you know how long it will take for it to get to the DCA or could the OC try and issue a CCJ? even though it's unlikely also for example would the OC agree to a reduction and a small payment over a super lengthy period of time if agreed? Rather than go through chasing apologies again for all the questions, just trying to understand all the possible scenarios.  
  • 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

Being set up to fail on purpose


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3447 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

I run a local work club where I help people with IT problems such as setting up email accounts, UJM accounts, CV building, basic Maths and English etc (voluntarily) and we had a new person arrive today in tears. It was his first time signing on and in his own words has no idea about computers, never used one, doesn't know how to turn one on etc.

 

After calming him down and telling him I was there to help he told me on his very first visit to the JCP that unless he has an email account set up, UJM set up and a CV printed and saved he would 'be liable to sanction'

 

Bear in mind he has no skills IT wise and only very basic English and Maths skills and no PC access he would not have a clue how to do any of this and would have risked no benefit money and an automatic sanction on his second visit.

 

I told him that the JCP adviser was a bit extreme and as long as you initially show evidence of what you are doing to find work the email account, UJM and CV can be done in the coming weeks. He said he would do this to his adviser but the adviser, or coach or whatever they are called this week said it has to be done by his 9am appointment on 25th.

 

Luckily he used his common sense and found the work club and I was able to do it all for him this morning BUT me doing it doesn't solve the problem, he needs help and training to do it himself especially if using UJM and email regularly. In my opinion the adviser/coach has set him up to fail at his first hurdle.

 

He then told me the adviser/coach wants to see evidence this had been done so I printed a copy of his CV, noted his email address and password on paper and his UJM gateway code and advised him not to show his password to the adviser/coach. He also said he has to tick the authorisation on UJM, I said "leave it unticked, it is not mandatory for you to let them have access" but I wondered should I have done this to save him aggro - if he gets pulled on it I will fight his case for him.

 

All in all, as the title says, I think he has been set up to fail from the start.

 

In other news, unemployment is down, funny that being the summer season, but now that is over let's see the next set of figures - oh, and what about the thousands moving to ESA from JSA?

  • Haha 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

The more interesting thing is the thousands moving from jsa to wtc due to being 'self employed' undoubtedly under the direction of the work programme provider.

 

Regarding your guy, I think you did exactly right and he was lucky to find you. Yes I agree, sounds like a more easy target has been preyed upon by a target driven 'coach'.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good for you helping the guy, Matt.

 

Best to start as you mean to go on and not let the JC have access to your friends UJ account. Once they enter his email address he used to create the account they'll get a message telling them they don't have permission to view the account and this in itself is concrete proof that he did indeed create one - it says so in the UJ Toolkit, so that can be used if the adviser gets 'uppity' (as can the PCS memo issued last year telling JC staff they cannot make customers give access)

 

Disgraceful attitude by the so-called 'Coach'; she must have realised the guy had no knowledge of IT but did she try and help him or make allowances? No - far better to set the guy up for a fall.

 

It will be worth him recording every meeting with the JC too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bravo

 

Maybe people should start up volonteer JSA clubs where victims can be given advice. Aim = 1 per center minimum :D PIcket and flier outside to raise awareness XD

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

he told me on his very first visit to the JCP that unless he has an email account set up, UJM set up and a CV printed and saved he would 'be liable to sanction'

 

All "steps" mandated by the JCP must be appropriate in the claimant's circumstances - If he does not have access to a computer or is unable to use one, then requiring him to have email/UJM accounts is certainly unreasonable. unfortunately, challenging these directions requires a certain amount of knowledge and the willingness to stand your ground in the face of a possible sanction.

 

Perhaps this individual might appreciate the presence of an advocate at his next appointment - Not so easy to dominate (bully ?) if there is a witness who might be recording the proceedings.

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

Perhaps this individual might appreciate the presence of an advocate at his next appointment - Not so easy to dominate (bully ?) if there is a witness who might be recording the proceedings.

 

I don't disagree he was being set up to fail.

I don't disagree he might benefit by having someone with him at his next appointment.

 

I just wonder if their role to prevent him being bullied is clear: they might be a witness (passive), an advocate (active), or both a witness & an advocate : but the roles are different!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't disagree he was being set up to fail.

I don't disagree he might benefit by having someone with him at his next appointment.

 

I just wonder if their role to prevent him being bullied is clear: they might be a witness (passive), an advocate (active), or both a witness & an advocate : but the roles are different!

 

Good points - ideally the person would be both. If they drop a few DWP rules into the conversation and let the adviser know there's someone there with knowledge who can spot bulls*** then the adviser will hopefully take note and treat the customer properly.

 

..or they could just act as moral support and play dumb, letting the adviser dig themselves into a deeper hole - naturally you'd be recording everything for inclusion in a nice complaint letter. I suppose this could be considered as 'setting the adviser up to fail'. Seems fair to me :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

First of all, apologies for bumping this threadafter so long but I feel it is right to follow up what has been happening.

 

After many weeks of emailing backwards and forwards to the JCP manager we still have not got a conclusion as to the best way forward but today has been the best as I recieved an email from the JCP manager which read:

 

"Thank you for your email, and I acknowledge your concerns. To investigate this matter fully, I would appreciate it if you could supply me with the Name and National Insurance Number of the claimant concerned. This will enable me to discuss this specific case with the Work Coach concerned. I appreciate you may not wish to supply this information, so wish to assure you it is for training / case conference purposes only, not to pursue any activity with the person concerned"

 

I am yet to reply but rest assured I will not benaming the person. The most disturbing aspect of the email however is that I would know the NI number of the claimant.

 

I am usually very good at replying to emails but I am stumped as to what to say to be honest - any ideas good people of CAG?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunatly due to data protection concerns and also the interests of my client I am unable to provide you with the information you have requested unless my client gives me writen permission to pass this information onto you,

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

Unfortunatly due to data protection concerns and also the interests of my client I am unable to provide you with the information you have requested unless my client gives me writen permission to pass this information onto you,

 

Yep, short and sweet and to the point - will use that in it's simplicity

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I'd also want to be there during this 'discussion' between the JC manager and the Work Coach.. who's to say the Coach won't deny any knowledge of your friends lack of computer literacy? They may even claim they tried to 'help' him and he refused; I wouldn't put anything past them in order to get a sanction.

 

Pity the initial interview hadn't been recorded and the Coach shown to have been unreasonable in what they asked.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...