Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Well, that's it then. Clear proof of the rubbish cameras. Clear proof of double dipping. G24 won't be getting a penny. Belt & braces, I would write to the address LFI has found, include the evidence of double dipping, and ask Fraser Group to call their dogs off.
    • LOL. after sending Perch capital a CCA request with a stapled £1 PO attached (x2) Their lapdog Legal team TM Legal have sent me two letters today saying "due to a recent payment on the account, your account is open to legal/enforcement action" so i guess they have tried to apply that payment to the account to run the statue bar along. dirty tactics lol.
    • I have initiated the breathing space so ill wait. from re reading everything this what i understand BS gives me 60 days break from the creditors during these 60 days they may contact me and will most likely default I need to wait until after a default notice to see whether the OC will keep the debt or sell it off If kept by the OC then i should attempt a plan or pay some token payment? If sold to DCA then don't pay and after 6 years it will leave my credit report once the DN is registered with a date. DCA may start a CCJ but unlikely, if they do come back here. last question, do you know roughly how long this will all take? in terms of defaults/default notice, potential CCJ? Would you say I have 12 months plus from when the BS ends?
    • Well, it's up to you. Years & years & years ago the forum used to suggest appealing to POPLA, but then AFAIK POPLA's remit was changed and it became much more biased in favour of the PPCs. One of the problems with taking that route is that the onus will fall on you to prove your appeal, while if you do nothing the onus is on MET to start legal action which experience teaches they are very, very reluctant to do. If you go down the POPLA route I would think your ace would be insufficient signage.  Are you able to go back there and get photos of their rubbish, entrapping signs?
    • The first clearly visible sign as you pull in to the car park states “McDonald’s Customers Only 60 minutes” The next clearly visible sign is an almost identical sign outside Starbucks which states “60 minutes free stay for customers only” There are other signs towards the rear of the car park (away from the outlets) that have the terms and conditions on them in very small print.
  • 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

sanctions and learning difficulties


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3039 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

Hi, my cousin was sanctioned six weeks ago for not updating his cv when he worked for three months til his contract ended. The problem is he has learning difficulties and short term memory problems caused by illness as a baby. The job centre never gave him anything in writing to tell him his cv needed updating or that he was going to be sanctioned, they just did it. I think they are aware of his needs as they have sent him on specialised courses in the past.

I dont know if its too late to appeal the sanction but we at least want to put a complaint in to protect him from now on. It was annoying enough when they tried it with me but they shouldnt do it with someone so vulnerable. Any advice or info to pass onto his mum would be great

Link to post
Share on other sites

Six weeks would normally be too late to appeal but in this case I think it would be worth a shot. Late appeals can be accepted (up to 13 months from the decision date) where grounds for the appeal being late can be shown. The grounds here would be that the sanction decision was not notified in writing to the claimant. The basic grounds for appeal would be that the requirement to update the CV was not communicated to the claimant in writing and that it failed to take into account his specific needs as regards his disability. That assumes, of course, that the JCP already knew of his condition. The first step for this would be to request a Mandatory Reconsideration in writing. This can also be done by telephone, but I don't advise it.

 

He could also make a complaint about the matter to the manager at the Jobcentre where he signs on. This should be handled as a separate matter, since a complaint is not an appeal against a decision, and should definitely be done in writing. Make sure the letter states that it is a "Formal Complant" or words to that effect.

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

Please check out the FOI response, dated 6 Aug 2013, at this link:

 

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/169236/response/416439/attach/html/3/FOI%203348%20response.pdf.html

 

In particular:

 

Providing a CV, email address or telephone number is not mandatory, therefore is not sanctionable.

 

However, a Jobseeker's Allowance claimant may be issued with a Jobseeker's Direction, requiring them to take a reasonable, specific activity that will help them find work, e.g. getting a CV, telephone number or email address will help a claimant get a job. The decision to issue a Jobseeker's Direction must always take into account the claimant’s individual circumstances.

 

In addition to pointing out that the appropriate procedures for applying the sanction, even if it were legitimate, was not followed you might advise the office responsible for this iniquity:

 

On the basis of the DWP’s imposition of a sanction/penalty contrary to the principles of the Data Protection Act and total disregard for privacy of home life and correspondence in accordance with the Human Rights Act, not to mention their own Code of Conduct, please be advised that this is formal notification requesting that the sanction/penalty imposed on me be referred to a Decision Maker and comprehensive details of the adviser's opinions as to it's appropriateness be attached. I also insist on being given the opportunity of forwarding to the Decision Maker my objections and why I regard the adviser's action as inappropriate.

 

Not only has the adviser [Name him/her] acted illegally, s/he has failed in his/her contractual obligations to have regard for my personal circumstances of which s/he was fully aware, in fact it is my considered opinion that his/her actions were deliberately premeditated with a view to entrap me.

 

Due to this matter now being in dispute and reconsideration sought I wish to exercise my right to withdraw consent to access to, and retention of, hard or electronic copies of my CV to officers, agents, servants or others of the Secretary of State and that they do not issue a direction, amend my Jobseekers Agreement or make demands or impose penalties in regard to any changes that I may or may not choose to make to my CV.

I hope I can rely on you to comply with your Department's time regulations in responding to this formal request.

I remain,

Etc, Etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...