Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • old and new threads merged i though you were going to send the SB letter in 2017? dx  
    • dunno you've not scanned up what you've had before how can we tell?  
    • Today , after a lot of years i received a letter from this lot. Very friendly, "Were writing to remind you that we haven't had any contact from you in a while".  The velvet fist, followed by  a veiled threat to get their preferred debt collectors involved. Yep dead right. In 1992/3 I took out a Student load under duress from DHSS. up to 2000 I had successfully gotten deferment on low income. But rather than sign on as unemployed ,I decided to be self employed. I applied and they asked for all sorts of documents. I obliged and then correspondence ceased from them, circa 2001. To date I have had no correspondence from Student Loans. I was made redundant in 2009 and reached 65 in 2012 , at which age the loan should have been cancelled. Now , today, 12 years on retirement and 11 ( at least years after last contact) I get a letter with veiled threats. Do I , as I smell a scam a) ignore it and hope that Erudio will think that this phishing attempt has failed or b) respond with a statute barred letter or c) remind them of legal terms that loan should be cancelled 12 years ago or d) combination of b) +c)      
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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 Cancelled.......Help Needed Urgently **RESOLVED**


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3056 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

  • Replies 143
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Why have you paid £4 fir something u can get for free online?

 

I think on balance I would prefer to pay myself. Not everything that is free is as 'free' as it appears to be those sites are set up to make money.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In any event, not all interest bearing accounts leave a credit foot print. I'm guessing they have a data match which suggests the o/p has interest bearing savings.

 

Sorry i dont understand this .. My wife has never had an account with Natwest let alone five and Natwest have confirmed no record of her so how could any data search bring this up ??

Link to post
Share on other sites

Either by error or fraud silentmovieman, although i would err on the side of it being an error, if it was fraud it would show in cra files, as there is no evidence of any accounts with natwest in these files it kind of looks as though theres been an error made somewhere inbetween HMRC and HB. Probably linked someone elses details to yours/wifes by mistake.

The very lack of any info is good news for yr HB ckaim being re instated and backdated.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Click Here To Make A Donation

I am not legally trained or qualified, any advice i offer is gleaned from experience and general knowledge, if you are still unsure after receiving advice please seek legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've passed on all I've uncovered to the hb people by way of their chief executive but have heard nothing back. When should this become an actual complaint?

 

When you write asking that it be dealt with under the complaints procedure. Have they explained what the data match said?

 

Glad you got it sorted out

Please do not ask me for advice via PM as I will not reply.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When you write asking that it be dealt with under the complaints procedure. Have they explained what the data match said?

 

Glad you got it sorted out

 

Literally all they've told me is that hmrc have provided them with details about five accounts with natwest in my wife's name. I only found this out after raising the issue via email with the chief executive of the council.

 

He then extended the period i had to appeal in order to gather information to back up my claims that the accounts don't exist. I got the credit reports and info from natwest ask of which ive sent to the benefits team and the chief executive but now they're eerily silent which is why i may have to escalate further.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you deserve an explanation at the very least. Without giving too much away, does your wife have a "common" name? In as much could there be someone else with the same name & date of birth.

Please do not ask me for advice via PM as I will not reply.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you deserve an explanation at the very least. Without giving too much away, does your wife have a "common" name? In as much could there be someone else with the same name & date of birth.

 

Well our surname is the same as an actor who was caught with a prostitute named divine :-)

 

If i dont hear anything by tuesdsy ill chase them

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you deserve an explanation at the very least. Without giving too much away, does your wife have a "common" name? In as much could there be someone else with the same name & date of birth.

 

I wondered this too. But surely if you had a really common name, (like Smith) I would have thought they'd check your name, DOB and address.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wondered this too. But surely if you had a really common name, (like Smith) I would have thought they'd check your name, DOB and address.

 

Depends where the error is and if it's human or a computer!

 

 

O/p did they say which year these matches relate to? Was it prior to your claim?

Please do not ask me for advice via PM as I will not reply.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends where the error is and if it's human or a computer!

 

 

O/p did they say which year these matches relate to? Was it prior to your claim?

 

THey just wrote to us in December asking for information regarding a change in circumstance and this has escalated from there so Im guessing they got their info around that time?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It occurs to me that Silentmovieman is being tossed back and fore from 'apparatchiks' in one organisation/department to those in another and his questions and requests for details side-stepped or completely ignored.

They don't seem able to tell him what information they have exactly or where their information comes from. If they could tell him that perhaps he could hazard a guess at a year.

Seems he is now, yet again, awaiting a response.

Can anyone answer definitively how long he can give them to respond this time so that he can move on and put his complaints and grievances onto a formal footing?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Without sight of the complaints policy the Council it's hard to give a timescale. Ten days Is fairly common.

 

I would suggest that the O/P requests sight of the data match which initiated this action. Or failing that, that the council supply the details the match gave, with particular interest in the tax year the extract is in relation to.

Please do not ask me for advice via PM as I will not reply.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the update. Have amended the thread title to reflect the outcome.

 

The upshot of this is one would hope that the L.A. would show due diligence and cross check the data before inflicting misery on people. Failing that, make enquiries with the claimant before suspending a claim and watch them go in to arrears as a result.

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

Got a conclusion to this issue today.

 

Email came in this morning from the chief executive who has accepted my evidence that no such account exists and that my benefit has been reinstated .

 

Thank you all for the help and advice

Great news Silentmovieman. Well done for getting yourself out of another fine mess not of your making.

I would echo Mr.P's comments above that those officials should be encouraged to administer their duties more thoroughly and diligently.

At the very least you are due an apology for what you have been put through by what is nothing less than sheer maladministration.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...