Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3210 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 think that further steps toward completely killing off the accessibility of higher education for poorer people is a disgrace to the entire country.

(except Scotland of course)

The Tory Legacy

Record high Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

 

10 years to save the Vest

After Truss lost the shirt off the UKs back in 49 days

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 90
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

was expecting them to remove WRAG altogether and time limit CB on ESA SG. This budget surprised me.

 

Oh give the buggers time...

 

I think that further steps toward completely killing off the accessibility of higher education for poorer people is a disgrace to the entire country.

 

So do I.

Link to post
Share on other sites

given the rumours that budget was nowhere near as bad as feared. Probably rumours leaked so people grateful for what happened. Although I will feel sorry for new WRAG claimants.

 

Marcus6 WRAG isn't dropped but the premium is removed for new claimants.

 

 

my bad, sorry for that, so new claims will not get the premium that makes up the WRAG??

Link to post
Share on other sites

No. They will get the same amount as job seekers. Not even the flaming fifty pence extra that we'd seen reported the last time they'd talked about this idea a year or so ago.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There never was disability premium for WRAG.

 

I was expecting them to remove WRAG altogether and time limit CB on ESA SG. This budget surprised me.

 

 

 

Like you worried, i don't think it was as bad, as could of been a lot wose......

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's still pretty bad. Here is a blog from a couple of years ago with some tables that show the impact of the £20,000 cap on families:

 

http://blog.cix.co.uk/gmorgan/2013/09/15/the-impact-of-a-20000-benefit-cap/

 

How the hell are some of these families expected to live at all?

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh well, no point in applying for ESA from now on, as most successful claimants end up in the WRAG group anyway. *sigh*...

 

If on dla or pip, better off being on jsa than esa wrag as you'd still get the disability premiums. Of course that option is soon to end with UC....

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite a few bits I agree with. Never thought Id say that about a conservative budget.

 

HOWEVER

 

A few notes of concern also.

 

18-21s and Housing benefit. I echo Shelters report on this option. Those that are estranged form the family home are going to end up on the streets l like they did in the 1980s

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'm curious how they can remove the £30 a week 'top-up' from WRAG?

 

I'm on WRAG now and get the full £102.15 per week. Surely there's an argument to be had that why should 2 people, who are on the same benefit, have a £30 a week difference? This really doesn't seem fair to new claimants.

 

Although i imagine my question will be irrelevant once the inevitable happens and it's removed from existing WRAG claimants aswell.

 

I can see them asking existing WRAG claimants to have another medical, failing them (obviously) and telling them they need to make a new claim. :evil:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, I'm sure they'll try that trick too.

 

And as for those who are now breathing a collective sigh of relief and thinking, "Oh that wasn't so bad after all as it doesn't effect me", well remember what kind of government we're dealing with here and then remember the old poem...

 

"First they came for the Communists

And I did not speak out

Because I was not a Communist

Then they came for the Socialists

And I did not speak out

Because I was not a Socialist

Then they came for the trade unionists

And I did not speak out

Because I was not a trade unionist

Then they came for the Jews

And I did not speak out

Because I was not a Jew

Then they came for me

And there was no one left

To speak out for me "

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just been placed on the wrag group as of the 29th june 2015. Had the letter to confirm as well. Will I be effected by the changes made today or not?

 

 

no you will not be effected by the changes made today, its only for new claims, IE any one that phones up to make a new claim thats who it will effected

 

 

But then saying that, take a look at the BBC news pages it says >>

 

Those claiming the working element of Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) will see payments reduced, to match Job Seekers Allowance (JSA).

 

 

so i'm not sure what they will do now??

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tax Credits

Any family which has a third or subsequent child born after April 2017 will not qualify for Child Tax Credit, which amounts to up to £2,780 a year per child. This will also apply to families claiming Universal Credit for the first time after April 2017.

However those who have been in receipt of tax credits or Universal Credit with an interruption of less than six months, will be protected.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Employment and Support Allowance (ESA)

Currently those who claim the Work Related Activity Group (WRAG) element of ESA get £30 more than JSA. But from April 2017, those who are able to work will get an equivalent rate. That is currently £73.10 for someone over the age of 25, or £57.90 for 18-24 year-olds. The WRAG element of ESA currently pays £103 a week.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole point is that people in wrag are NOT able to work, otherwise they would have failed their assessments.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

The office for budget responsibility summary :

EFO-07-15.png

The new Government has used its first Budget to loosen significantly the impending squeeze on public services, financed by :

 

welfare cuts,

net tax increases

and three years of higher borrowing.

 

http://budgetresponsibility.independent.gov.uk/

The Tory Legacy

Record high Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

 

10 years to save the Vest

After Truss lost the shirt off the UKs back in 49 days

Link to post
Share on other sites

Employment and Support Allowance (ESA)

Currently those who claim the Work Related Activity Group (WRAG) element of ESA get £30 more than JSA. But from April 2017, those who are able to work will get an equivalent rate. .

 

ESA WRAG starts at 48:00

 

 

"For future claimants only we will align the ESA Work related activity group rate with the rate of jobseekers allowance"

 

"No current claimants will be affected by this change"

 

Though the News and Newspaper websites don't mention it's for new claimants only. Scaremongering?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm curious how they can remove the £30 a week 'top-up' from WRAG?

 

I'm on WRAG now and get the full £102.15 per week. Surely there's an argument to be had that why should 2 people, who are on the same benefit, have a £30 a week difference? This really doesn't seem fair to new claimants.

 

Although i imagine my question will be irrelevant once the inevitable happens and it's removed from existing WRAG claimants aswell.

 

I can see them asking existing WRAG claimants to have another medical, failing them (obviously) and telling them they need to make a new claim. :evil:

 

you right but they playing clever.

 

remember when pip was initially in limited areas, this was to stop widespread backlash. They hope the existing wrag claimants will stay quiet.

 

Whilst I said I am surprised at the budget that it isn't as bad as expected, I do of course still worry for those affected especially the young who will get no housing support.

Link to post
Share on other sites

even if they do not remove wrag component from existing claimants, they will either engineer breaks forcing new claims, i.e. fail an assessment - forced to claim JSA - re-apply for ESA on new condition - pass assessment but no wrag component

 

for those fortunate enough not to have a break - they may just freeze ESA so the component is eroded each year

If you have found my post useful, please click on the star at the bottom of my post and add some reputation points.

Link to post
Share on other sites

not getting much attention is

 

1) freeze on applicable amounts in HB which will see low pay workers HB being cut

 

2) removal of family element in CTC & UC and removal of family premium in HB

 

3) increase in tax credit taper from 41% to 48%

 

4) work allowance in UC totally abolished for single people and couples (unless disabled or have children)

 

5) HB backdating period to be reduced from 26 weeks to 4 week

If you have found my post useful, please click on the star at the bottom of my post and add some reputation points.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...