Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Northmonk forget what I said about your Notice to Hirer being the best I have seen . Though it  still may be  it is not good enough to comply with PoFA. Before looking at the NTH, we can look at the original Notice to Keeper. That is not compliant. First the period of parking as sated on their PCN is not actually the period of parking but a misstatement  since it is only the arrival and departure times of your vehicle. The parking period  is exactly that -ie the time youwere actually parked in a parking spot.  If you have to drive around to find a place to park the act of driving means that you couldn't have been parked at the same time. Likewise when you left the parking place and drove to the exit that could not be describes as parking either. So the first fail is  failing to specify the parking period. Section9 [2][a] In S9[2][f] the Act states  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN fails to mention the words in parentheses despite Section 9 [2]starting by saying "The notice must—..." As the Notice to Keeper fails to comply with the Act,  it follows that the Notice to Hirer cannot be pursued as they couldn't get the NTH compliant. Even if the the NTH was adjudged  as not  being affected by the non compliance of the NTK, the Notice to Hirer is itself not compliant with the Act. Once again the PCN fails to get the parking period correct. That alone is enough to have the claim dismissed as the PCN fails to comply with PoFA. Second S14 [5] states " (5)The notice to Hirer must— (a)inform the hirer that by virtue of this paragraph any unpaid parking charges (being parking charges specified in the notice to keeper) may be recovered from the hirer; ON their NTH , NPE claim "The driver of the above vehicle is liable ........" when the driver is not liable at all, only the hirer is liable. The driver and the hirer may be different people, but with a NTH, only the hirer is liable so to demand the driver pay the charge  fails to comply with PoFA and so the NPE claim must fail. I seem to remember that you have confirmed you received a copy of the original PCN sent to  the Hire company plus copies of the contract you have with the Hire company and the agreement that you are responsible for breaches of the Law etc. If not then you can add those fails too.
    • Weaknesses in some banks' security measures for online and mobile banking could leave customers more exposed to scammers, new data from Which? reveals.View the full article
    • I understand what you mean. But consider that part of the problem, and the frustration of those trying to help, is the way that questions are asked without context and without straight facts. A lot of effort was wasted discussing as a consumer issue before it was mentioned that the property was BTL. I don't think we have your history with this property. Were you the freehold owner prior to this split? Did you buy the leasehold of one half? From a family member? How was that funded (earlier loan?). How long ago was it split? Have either of the leasehold halves changed hands since? I'm wondering if the split and the leashold/freehold arrangements were set up in a way that was OK when everyone was everyone was connected. But a way that makes the leasehold virtually unsaleable to an unrelated party.
  • 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

A change to ESA rules of assesments in 2015?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3339 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

The Employment and Support Allowance assessments' could be changing as of 2015 please read the attachment or follow this link HERE

This is a 93 page report sorry about the long read folks

If I have been of any help, please click on my star and leave a note to let me know, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When is it to be implemented if it goes through into law So how are those that are too sick to work but incorrectly assessed by Maximus ect going to survive this is so wrong its untrue ,If they had a proper WCA that was fit for purpose and carried out by people who were not trained to ignore/disregard real health issues that affect a persons ability to work then this reclaiming cycle and appeals wouldn't be necessary

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this bloody government is really taking the p*ss now. They are pushing people too far.

 

The idea that you can never ever reclaim with the same condition if you fail a WCA is ridiculous as well as cruel.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh its very wrong and i would argue illegal what they are going to do, I hope this really backfires on them in a spectacular way Civil war and anarchy are getting closer by the day IMO thanks to the likes of this government ,

Link to post
Share on other sites

... The idea that you can never ever reclaim with the same condition if you fail a WCA is ridiculous as well as cruel.

I haven't waded through the document but, crikey, is this correct? It took me three attempts for the same condition before I was accepted straight into the support group. I only have the one condition which is cunningly designed to get steadily worse until I pop my clogs. I'll be right in the poo if I have one of their miracle cures!

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can reclaim with the same condition, but only if you show it has worsened. So you'd put a claim in, a decision maker would look at it and the evidence, either refuse the claim or refer for wca. I can't see from this (I just skimmed) when the person would be eligible for payment; when the decision maker decides the condition is worsened and refers for wca or when a person passes the wca.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes thats the case. If you fail your WCA you cannot reclaim with the same condition ever, unless you can show proof it's got worse.

 

Do they have teams of people thinking up this crap or what? Imo this is all out war on the sick and disabled.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This rotten government is hell bent of putting people with disabilities in their coffins !!! These changes not long before the election Is just s kick in the teeth from them as they must know there on the way out.....

My condition is varied and changes so I'm pretty stuffed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm surprised that this 'loophole' hadn't been closed down years ago. It wasn't called the 'magic roundabout' for no reason. It was a cynical way of remaining on ESA with the same condition going from assessment to Tribunal and back to assessment time and time and time again. Effectively you remained on ESA (Income based obviously) for years until you got lucky.

 

 

Don't start blaming the government for this change, blame those that have played and abused this system since 2008.

To suggest that there is no alternative is wrong.

 

 

JSA can be claimed in a modified form in the interim until either there is a deterioration of an existing condition or a new one pops up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm surprised that this 'loophole' hadn't been closed down years ago. It wasn't called the 'magic roundabout' for no reason. It was a cynical way of remaining on ESA with the same condition going from assessment to Tribunal and back to assessment time and time and time again. Effectively you remained on ESA (Income based obviously) for years until you got lucky.

 

 

Don't start blaming the government for this change, blame those that have played and abused this system since 2008.

To suggest that there is no alternative is wrong.

 

 

JSA can be claimed in a modified form in the interim until either there is a deterioration of an existing condition or a new one pops up.

But if you where to examine the facts as to why this was and will remain to happen you will probably find that most of them where people who should of never been found fit for work in the first place The unfit for purpose WCA should be scrapped and some of those who work for ATOS carrying out these WCA's should be stripped of their medical qualifications and never allowed to practise again , But oh no it's easier to persecute the sick

 

JSA You really believe that that will work out for most who should be on esa ? Did you go to government brainwashing sessions?

It may of worked back in the 90's but it would not today, when JCP staff are always looking for ways to sanction you, they have targets to meet , They would not be accommodating the Job seekers commitment BS prevents that

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm surprised that this 'loophole' hadn't been closed down years ago. It wasn't called the 'magic roundabout' for no reason. It was a cynical way of remaining on ESA with the same condition going from assessment to Tribunal and back to assessment time and time and time again. Effectively you remained on ESA (Income based obviously) for years until you got lucky. ...

 

Hahaha. Excellent WUMming there. Your condition had to be worse to re-claim, so nothing has changed. :lol:

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It will be changed , as they are going to stop paying pre assessment rate whist you await a tribunal determination where they are currently paying up to that hearing , Of course by doing this they are basically forcing people to make up stuff in order to avoid going onto JSA and end up getting sanctioned

Link to post
Share on other sites

It will be changed , as they are going to stop paying pre assessment rate whist you await a tribunal determination where they are currently paying up to that hearing , Of course by doing this they are basically forcing people to make up stuff in order to avoid going onto JSA and end up getting sanctioned

 

I won't be surprised if people either make up stuff to carry on claiming ESA or end up saying (because for many, this will be the case) they now have depression because the whole situation is actually making them depressed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It all about "conditionality"

 

With Universal Credit ESA is gone! It is replaced by 2 levels of conditionality;

 

Support Group - zero conditionality (initially as I'll expect creep here soon)

Work Related - less than normal (this is already moving towards full conditionality)

 

Now with UC you will move in and out of conditionality depending on where you are on your glorious claimant journey.

 

Fail a single WCA and the only protection will be your ability to negotiate a reduced standard claimant commitment with a fit note from a GP or consultant. We all know how well this is working currently with MR!

 

There is this new 13 weeks regulation which gives you zero conditionality from a fit note. What use this will be I'm not sure

 

Although the natural progression would be to make the 13 weeks compulsory, followed by 13 weeks for WCA assessment thus bringing it to 26 weeks in line with PIP. You then amalgamate what was PIP and ESA into a new single disability payment covered by a single test - thus reducing assessment costs whilst cutting the hell out of any new payments made. .

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 years I've been fighting them. It really is two steps forward one step back with these crooks.

 

I've a very good mind to sue the so called 'HCP' who fabricated my WCA, and began my three year fight.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hahaha. Excellent WUMming there. Your condition had to be worse to re-claim, so nothing has changed. :lol:

only if it was less than 6 months from when the original decision was made. Given that appeals/reconsiderations are taking more than 6 months from the decision date, you could reclaim for the same condition after being found 'fit for work' on the same day as the Tribunal decision was given. Consequently you were able to receive ESA continually even though every decision went against you. I seem to remember that you did that reclaimed straight after the Tribunal decisions that also failed you?

 

 

There needed a break in that ridiculous situation. It was wide open to abuse by those who decided that claiming JSA was too aggravating.

All you needed were sick notes which allowed people to keep on the 'magic roundabout/revolving door' year after year even though they had never passed the ESA test!

Link to post
Share on other sites

only if it was less than 6 months from when the original decision was made. Given that appeals/reconsiderations are taking more than 6 months from the decision date, you could reclaim for the same condition after being found 'fit for work' on the same day as the Tribunal decision was given. Consequently you were able to receive ESA continually even though every decision went against you. I seem to remember that you did that reclaimed straight after the Tribunal decisions that also failed you?

 

 

There needed a break in that ridiculous situation. It was wide open to abuse by those who decided that claiming JSA was too aggravating.

All you needed were sick notes which allowed people to keep on the 'magic roundabout/revolving door' year after year even though they had never passed the ESA test!

 

Might I ask how you know that please, TCS?

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

only if it was less than 6 months from when the original decision was made. Given that appeals/reconsiderations are taking more than 6 months from the decision date, you could reclaim for the same condition after being found 'fit for work' on the same day as the Tribunal decision was given. Consequently you were able to receive ESA continually even though every decision went against you. I seem to remember that you did that reclaimed straight after the Tribunal decisions that also failed you?

 

 

There needed a break in that ridiculous situation. It was wide open to abuse by those who decided that claiming JSA was too aggravating.

All you needed were sick notes which allowed people to keep on the 'magic roundabout/revolving door' year after year even though they had never passed the ESA test!

 

Many found fit for work won't get JSA. They are too ill to claim it. So what do they live on? Thin air?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...