Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Fraudsters copy the details of firms we authorise to try and convince people that their firm is genuine. Find out why you shouldn’t deal with this clone firm.View the full article
    • Hi again all, below is another email they sent me, I just don't want to get in trouble or things to get worse with this crowd but I am taking your advice here. Anyway advice would be appreciated.   I am contacting you again after having tried to contact you both by email on 03/04/2024 and 10/04/2024, and by telephone on 10/04/2024 and 17/04/2024 to discuss the matter in relation to the regularization of the SOLIDWORKS case against xxx our company.   This is an urgent legal matter. Please contact me at your earliest convenience - +44 2921 920 296.    If we do not recieve a response before 24/04/2024, we will assume that you are not willing to settle this dispute amicably. The case will then be referred back to our client with whom, ultimately, the final decision lies on the enforcement of their intellectual property rights.    Yours sincerel y, Rhys
    • If you do get a letter of Claim and or Pre Action Protocol pack 15. Where there has been non-compliance with a pre-action protocol or this Practice Direction, the court may order that (a) the parties are relieved of the obligation to comply or further comply with the pre-action protocol or this Practice Direction; (b) the proceedings are stayed while particular steps are taken to comply with the pre-action protocol or this Practice Direction; (c) sanctions are to be applied. 16. The court will consider the effect of any non-compliance when deciding whether to impose any sanctions which may include— (a) an order that the party at fault pays the costs of the proceedings, or part of the costs of the other party or parties; (b) an order that the party at fault pay those costs on an indemnity basis; (c) if the party at fault is a claimant who has been awarded a sum of money, an order depriving that party of interest on that sum for a specified period, and/or awarding interest at a lower rate than would otherwise have been awarded; (d) if the party at fault is a defendant, and the claimant has been awarded a sum of money, an order awarding interest on that sum for a specified period at a higher rate, (not exceeding 10% above base rate), than the rate which would otherwise have been awarded. https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/pd_pre-action_conduct   .
  • 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

Living at my EX for 2 nights a week - will it affect her benefits?


play
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3498 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

My ex has recently got a temporary studio flat from the council with a view to getting her on the council property list. She is not currently working (FT mum) as we have a baby of 9 months. So naturally she is recieving the usual benefits (housing, IS, and whatever she is eligible for ect...)

 

We broke up on good terms and she allowed me to stay weekends at her previous address (her mums) so i can spend time with my daughter as she lives quite far. At that time she wasn't receiving benefits.

 

Now she is not letting me stay at her temporary place in fear that the council and the benefit agency will claim that we are living as a couple.

 

I dont contribute to any of her bills or pay for any child care (officially) or have anything that links me to her address. I live at my parents and pay rent as well as the phone bill and internet. All my bank accounts are registered at my parents, my driving licence and car are all registered at my parents where i actually live for 5 days a week.

 

If i stay 2 nights a week (on the sofa no doubt!) should she have anything to worry about.

 

I have done some googleling and it seems that if i can prove that i'm not living there. That we should have nothing to worry about.

 

She also claims the Landlord (who works for the council) said she is not suppose to have visitors, i believe that is false as i'm sure that is against human rights!

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK

 

1) Not allowed visitors - (Check the tenancy agreement)

2) If you can prove that you are paying to live somewhere else eg rent, bills etc, then you cannot be living in 2 places at once. The hard part here is that you pay your rent to your parents which in the eyes of the council degrades the evidence a little.

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

I would say its dodgy ground. Could you not just visit in the day time or meet in a place thats halfway between houses? I appreciate you want to spend time with your daughter but surely you would rather see her a little less often but know her mum is able to take care of her by receiving everything she is entitled too and it not be suspended because someone has reported you?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say its dodgy ground. Could you not just visit in the day time or meet in a place thats halfway between houses? I appreciate you want to spend time with your daughter but surely you would rather see her a little less often but know her mum is able to take care of her by receiving everything she is entitled too and it not be suspended because someone has reported you?

 

Thats what she wants to do now, but its not ideal. I need to spend the weekend with my daughter as its the only time i have. She is the only thing that keeps me going, and i dont want to see her less.

Edited by play
Link to post
Share on other sites

OK

 

1) Not allowed visitors - (Check the tenancy agreement)

2) If you can prove that you are paying to live somewhere else eg rent, bills etc, then you cannot be living in 2 places at once. The hard part here is that you pay your rent to your parents which in the eyes of the council degrades the evidence a little.

 

Thank you

 

Thats a point regarding the Tenancy agreement, i will check that today. If there is nothing on the agreement regarding visitors i assume that i can stay for a couple of nights without affecting my ex's benefit's? The main thing is i'm not staying as a couple, i am only staying so i can spend the weekend with my daughter. Its more convienient like that.

If there is a visitor clause in the agreement, will that affect her benefit's? or just her tenancy?

 

Regarding the rent, i do realise that, however when i take money out of my account, i pay it into my old mans account on the same day. This shows a bit of consistancy hopefully. The telephone landline and internet is under my name as well as bank accounts, credit cards, driving licence, car and all my belongings (which is a lot)! I'm sure this is enough evidence that i live at my parents.

 

Thank You in Advance

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats what she wants to do now, but its not ideal. I need to spend the weekend with my daughter as its the only time i have. She is the only thing that keeps me going, and i dont want to see her less.

 

I appreciate its not ideal. Could your daughter not stay overnight with you or will that have to wait until she is older? Or maybe your ex is trying to politely hint she doesn't want you to stay overnight anymore?

Link to post
Share on other sites

My ex has recently got a temporary studio flat from the council with a view to getting her on the council property list. She is not currently working (FT mum) as we have a baby of 9 months. So naturally she is recieving the usual benefits (housing, IS, and whatever she is eligible for ect...)

 

We broke up on good terms and she allowed me to stay weekends at her previous address (her mums) so i can spend time with my daughter as she lives quite far. At that time she wasn't receiving benefits.

 

Now she is not letting me stay at her temporary place in fear that the council and the benefit agency will claim that we are living as a couple.

 

I dont contribute to any of her bills or pay for any child care (officially) or have anything that links me to her address. I live at my parents and pay rent as well as the phone bill and internet. All my bank accounts are registered at my parents, my driving licence and car are all registered at my parents where i actually live for 5 days a week.

 

If i stay 2 nights a week (on the sofa no doubt!) should she have anything to worry about.

 

I have done some googleling and it seems that if i can prove that i'm not living there. That we should have nothing to worry about.

 

She also claims the Landlord (who works for the council) said she is not suppose to have visitors, i believe that is false as i'm sure that is against human rights!

 

 

What do you mean by you don't pay for child care officially, if your ex is getting income based benefits she has to declare any income she gets, if you pay her childcare and she hasn't notified the benefits agency or the council (for HB and CTC) then that could be seen as fraud, if you pay her cash so it doesn't show up on any bank statements she may have to produce to prove her income and entitlement to income based benefits then I believe it is actually fraud

Link to post
Share on other sites

What do you mean by you don't pay for child care officially, if your ex is getting income based benefits she has to declare any income she gets, if you pay her childcare and she hasn't notified the benefits agency or the council (for HB and CTC) then that could be seen as fraud, if you pay her cash so it doesn't show up on any bank statements she may have to produce to prove her income and entitlement to income based benefits then I believe it is actually fraud

 

no what i mean is i will buy my daughter necessities such as milk powder and stuff, she never ask for it. i do for my little one. I never give cash to my ex and she never ask.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You should not be seen as living with your ex under current regulations. But having said that, there's one thing to note: "living together" isn't actually defined in law.

 

Here's what I mean: if there is ever a question about whether two people are "living together as a married couple" then it is considered by a DWP or council Decision Maker (DM), and each individual case is considered on its merits. There is no specific law which defines what "living together" means.

 

So, when deciding whether or not you "live with" this lady, a DM would be expected to apply a general "common sense" definition of "living together" (and sorry for all the "" marks.)

 

Possible considerations would be:

 

  • Is this the address at which you pay Council Tax, or is it otherwise your normal residence?
  • How many nights do you spend there?
  • Are your bills sent to another address?
  • Where would most people say you live?
  • Is her address where you have your Driving Licence, electricity bill or other major expenses
  • Do you share the cost of living there with her - that is, the rent or mortgage?
  • Why do you spend time at her address?
  • Would most people see you as a couple?
  • Do you pay rent somewhere else?

I know that sounds vague, but if I were a DM then based on the evidence, I would not see you as a couple. You can read more information here.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING. EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

The idea that all politicians lie is music to the ears of the most egregious liars.

Link to post
Share on other sites

no what i mean is i will buy my daughter necessities such as milk powder and stuff, she never ask for it. i do for my little one. I never give cash to my ex and she never ask.

 

 

So exactly why are you not providing for your own child officially in the form of child support, why are you expecting the tax payer (ie people like me) to feed house and clothe your child

Link to post
Share on other sites

So exactly why are you not providing for your own child officially in the form of child support, why are you expecting the tax payer (ie people like me) to feed house and clothe your child

 

There is no requirement for an "official" child support arrangement if the parents agree on something else. Maintenance payments are fully disregarded for all benefits - "the taxpayer" is paying exactly the same either way.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING. EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

The idea that all politicians lie is music to the ears of the most egregious liars.

Link to post
Share on other sites

to answer you question about how often someone stays to be considered to be living together it is usually more than 3 night a week. As said, this is not hard and fast as they will consider the relationship more than just the times you stop there.

 

Thats an old wives tale. There is no set amount of time for someone to be classed as living somewhere.

 

Take a long distance lorry driver. 5 days out of 7 on the road, under your 3 nights a week rule, he would live in his lorry.

 

LA's and the DWP look and 6 strands when making a decision on were someone lives.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

So exactly why are you not providing for your own child officially in the form of child support, why are you expecting the tax payer (ie people like me) to feed house and clothe your child

 

chill out man, i ain't [problem]ming the system. I pay as much tax as the next working man and never claimed a dime from the government ever. My ex also was working full time before she decided to become a full time parent (She also has never claimed any handouts before). She has not requested i pay child support as she knows I'm in a very difficult financial situation. So get off your high horse before judging others.

 

Thank you for all the other helpful replies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...