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

Dental penalty charge


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2497 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 recently received a letter from the NHS informing me I have to pay a penalty charge of £94 on top of £18.80 for my check-up.

in 1980 I was diagnosed with Epilepsy and informed by my GP and my Dentist that due to my medication(Phenytoin) I would not have to pay for dental treatment. I have never been told by anyone that this is no longer the case.

If I now have to pay then that's fine but I have not received any correspondence from the NHS informing me of changes to the rules and I object to a penalty charge for that amount for something I think is not my fault

I've been with this Dentist for over a decade and always fill the form in before the course of treatment and they've not contacted me before.

I do have a NHS Medical Exemption Certificate and I'm in receipt of Tax Credits.

Does anyone know if and when the rules changed?

 

 

Many thanks in advance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.nhs.uk/chq/Pages/1786.aspx?CategoryID=74

 

 

This is the link to NHS dental charges and exemptions This is what is said about Tax Credit Exemptions

do you have or have you applied for one of these

 

 

you’re named on, or entitled to, a valid NHS tax credit exemption certificate

 

The rules have changed since the 80s and its not really the NHS job to inform you, the onus is on you to ensure you have the correct exemption before you sign the form.

 

 

 

 

Just as an aside is your medical exemption certificate up to date as since 2003 they expire every 5 years ( even if your medical condition is a life long one and not subject to change ) if not you may incur a penalty charge if you sign the back of the prescription saying you have a valid exemption card - You will need to ask your doctor to complete and submit a new FP92A application form if its out of date.

 

 

Like prescriptions the NHS is tightening up the procedures for ensuring everyone who claims free dental treatment has the correct exemption documentation. The Dentist and pharmacists do not see it as their job to 'police' payments which is why the NHS use a separate department to investigate the validity of exemption claims and you do agree to this when you sign the dentists forms and the back of prescriptions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would argue that it is the responsibility of the NHS to notify people of rule changes. I would not have signed anything knowing I was not entitled to free treatment.

 

 

Nobody wants to know = been thru that area with the idiots = complacency by them

:mad2::-x:jaw::sad:
Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately the NHSBSA don’t agree that it’s their responsibility. On the signature page of each of the forms that we sign to indicate our eligibility for free treatment there’s often a passage to the effect of:

False information may lead to civil or criminal action. We expect the person signing this

form to take reasonable care to make sure the information given is correct. Anyone found

to have wrongly claimed help with NHS health costs will have to pay a penalty charge or

may face prosecution.

If a change in the rules surrounding eligibility have occurred and, in truth I can’t think of much that hasn’t changed since the 80’s, then it’s the responsibility of the person signing it to check. I understand how frustrating it must be, absolutely, but if this were a consumer issue for example, we’d direct people to the terms and conditions of the merchant once we’d satisfied ourselves that the legislative requirements had been met. Unfortunately all Madam Fluff is done is direct you to the very same.

My views are my own and are not representative of any organisation. if you've found my post helpful please click on the star below.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My views are my own and are not representative of any organisation. if you've found my post helpful please click on the star below.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How lawful is the penalty charge and its amount?

 

 

It would seem so

 

National Health Service (Penalty Charge) Regulations 1999

 

2.3 The NHS Penalty Charge Regulations 1999 came into force on 1 November

 

1999, and are referred to in this document as “The Regulations”.

2.4 Penalties can only be imposed in respect of unpaid health costs arising on or

 

 

after the date the regulations came into force.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Only in England? Not necessarily, there are slight differences in implementation across the borders but one of the few constants in all areas is the NHSBSA. My NHS experience in Scotland, Wales and England has consistently shown them to be at work.

My views are my own and are not representative of any organisation. if you've found my post helpful please click on the star below.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

If I may hijack this thread to ask a similar question - 3 months ago my Dentist receptionist accidentally printed off and gave me a list of the £35 charges I used to get hit with about 7 years ago (when I was in a job where leaving to attend appointments was not as easy as it should have been. I'm not there anymore, thankfully) for missing or , more often, being late for appointments. I was surprised to see that over a 2 year period they had charged me over 8 of them. Obviously I paid but I was always curious as to how legally enforceable they were?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this £50 fine lawful or is it worth challenging?

 

 

 

You have already asked and I answered on post 9

 

 

and if you are still not convinced

 

 

http://www.nhsbsa.nhs.uk/DentalServices/Documents/PrescriptionServices/penalty_guidance.pdf

 

 

but you can appeal

http://www.nhsbsa.nhs.uk/DentalServices/Documents/DentalServices/Appeals_Process_Patient_View-Final-02032015.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've accepted the first "fine" even tho' I have had it confirmed to me I WAS given incorrect info by my dentist, I'm asking about if a late fee of £50 is OTT as a penalty charge for forgetting to pay £11. I've never deliberately tried to rip off the NHS and was told repeatedly over many years I didn't have to pay 'cos of the medication I have to take. When this changed I should have been notified! I am not Mystic Meg.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I may hijack this thread to ask a similar question - 3 months ago my Dentist receptionist accidentally printed off and gave me a list of the £35 charges I used to get hit with about 7 years ago (when I was in a job where leaving to attend appointments was not as easy as it should have been. I'm not there anymore, thankfully) for missing or , more often, being late for appointments. I was surprised to see that over a 2 year period they had charged me over 8 of them. Obviously I paid but I was always curious as to how legally enforceable they were?

 

Could anyone help with my query, please?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...