Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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.   
    • S13 (2)The creditor may not exercise the right under paragraph 4 to recover from the keeper any unpaid parking charges specified in the notice to keeper if, within the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which that notice was given, the creditor is given— (a)a statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement; (b)a copy of the hire agreement; and (c)a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement. As  Arval has complied with the above they cannot be pursued by EC----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S14 [1]   the creditor may recover those charges (so far as they remain unpaid) from the hirer. (2)The conditions are that— (a)the creditor has within the relevant period given the hirer a notice in accordance with sub-paragraph (5) (a “notice to hirer”), together with a copy of the documents mentioned in paragraph 13(2) and the notice to keeper; (b)a period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the notice to hirer was given has elapsed;  As ECP did not send copies of the documents to your company and they have given 28 days instead of 21 days they have failed to comply with  the Act so you and your Company are absolved from paying. That is not to say that they won't continue asking to be paid as they do not have the faintest idea how PoFA works. 
    • Euro have got a lot wrong and have failed to comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4.  According to Section 13 after ECP have written to Arval they should then send a NTH to the Hirer  which they have done.This eliminates Arval from any further pursuit by ECP. When they wrote to your company they should have sent copies of everything that they asked Arval for. This is to prove that your company agree what happened on the day of the breach. If ECP then comply with the Act they are allowed to pursue the hirer. If they fail, to comply they cannot make the hirer pay. They can pursue until they are blue in the face but the Hirer is not lawfully required to pay them and if it went to Court ECP would lose. Your company could say who was driving but the only person that can be pursued is the Hirer, there does not appear to be an extension for a driver to be pursued. Even if there was, because ECP have failed miserably to comply with the Act  they still have no chance of winning in Court. Here are the relevant Hire sections from the Act below.
    • Thank-you FTMDave for your feedback. May I take this opportunity to say that after reading numerous threads to which you are a contributor, I have great admiration for you. You really do go above and beyond in your efforts to help other people. The time you put in to help, in particular with witness statements is incredible. I am also impressed by the way in which you will defer to others with more experience should there be a particular point that you are not 100% clear on and return with answers or advice that you have sought. I wish I had the ability to help others as you do. There is another forum expert that I must also thank for his time and patience answering my questions and allowing me to come to a “penny drops” moment on one particular issue. I believe he has helped me immensely to understand and to strengthen my own case. I shall not mention who it is here at the moment just in case he would rather I didn't but I greatly appreciate the time he took working through that issue with me. I spent 20+ years of working in an industry that rules and regulations had to be strictly adhered to, indeed, exams had to be taken in order that one had to become qualified in those rules and regulations in order to carry out the duties of the post. In a way, such things as PoFA 2012 are rules and regulations that are not completely alien to me. It has been very enjoyable for me to learn these regulations and the law surrounding them. I wish I had found this forum years ago. I admit that perhaps I had been too keen to express my opinions given that I am still in the learning process. After a suitable period in this industry I became Qualified to teach the rules and regulations and I always said to those I taught that there is no such thing as a stupid question. If opinions, theories and observations are put forward, discussion can take place and as long as the result is that the student is able to clearly see where they went wrong and got to that moment where the penny drops then that is a valuable learning experience. No matter how experienced one is, there is always something to learn and if I did not know the answer to a question, I would say, I don't know the answer to that question but I will go and find out what the answer is. In any posts I have made, I have stated, “unless I am wrong” or “as far as I can see” awaiting a response telling me what I got wrong, if it was wrong. If I am wrong I am only too happy to admit it and take it as a valuable learning experience. I take the point that perhaps I should not post on other peoples threads and I shall refrain from doing so going forward. 🤐 As alluded to, circumstances can change, FTMDave made the following point that it had been boasted that no Caggers, over two years, who had sent a PPC the wrong registration snotty letter, had even been taken to court, let alone lost a court hearing .... but now they have. I too used the word "seemed" because it is true, we haven't had all the details. After perusing this forum I believe certain advice changed here after the Beavis case, I could be wrong but that is what I seem to remember reading. Could it be that after winning the above case in question, a claimant could refer back to this case and claim that a defendant had not made use of the appeal process, therefore allowing the claimant to win? Again, in this instance only, I do not know what is to be gained by not making an appeal or concealing the identity of the driver, especially if it is later admitted that the defendant was the driver and was the one to input the incorrect VRN in error. So far no one has educated me as to the reason why. But, of course, when making an appeal, it should be worded carefully so that an error in the appeal process cannot be referred back to. I thought long and hard about whether or not to post here but I wanted to bring up this point for discussion. Yes, I admit I have limited knowledge, but does that mean I should have kept silent? After I posted that I moved away from this forum slightly to find other avenues to increase my knowledge. I bought a law book and am now following certain lawyers on Youtube in the hope of arming myself with enough ammunition to use in my own case. In one video titled “7 Reasons You Will LOSE Your Court Case (and how to avoid them)” by Black Belt Barrister I believe he makes my point by saying the following, and I quote: “If you ignore the complaint in the first instance and it does eventually end up in court then it's going to look bad that you didn't co-operate in the first place. The court is not going to look kindly on you simply ignoring the company and not, let's say, availing yourself of any kind of appeal opportunities, particularly if we are talking about parking charge notices and things like that.” This point makes me think that, it is not such a bizarre judgement in the end. Only in the case of having proof of payment and inputting an incorrect VRN .... could it be worthwhile making a carefully worded appeal in the first instance? .... If the appeal fails, depending on the reason, surely this could only help if it went to court? As always, any feedback gratefully received.
    • To which official body does one make a formal complaint about a LPA fixed charge receiver? Does one make a complaint first to the company employing the appointed individuals?    Or can one complain immediately to an official body, such as nara?    I've tried researching but there doesn't seem a very clear route on how to legally hold them to account for wrongful behaviour.  It seems frustratingly complicated because they are considered to be officers of the court and held in high esteem - and the borrower is deemed liable for their actions.  Yet what does the borrower do when disclosure shows clear evidence of wrong-doing? Does anyone have any pointers please?
  • 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

First time claming Universal Credit - am I up to date regarding my rights?


moodygirl86
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2698 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

  • 10 months later...

(BUMPING WITH AN UPDATE)

 

I found work in February but the organisation made cutbacks so had to leave in September. I moved cities and am now signing on at a different Jobcentre. Every time I go there, I speak to someone different. They all lie to you and say your jobsearch *has* to be presented in your Jobsmatch account, but they do back off when you quote the bits from the Toolkit that contradict this. Not only that, but the "Your work search" section of the paperwork they give you when you first claim specifically says:

 

Recording your job search

 

You also need to keep a record of what you do each week, so you can discuss this when we meet. The best way to record what you've done is to write it down online or on Universal Jobsmatch (http://www.gov.uk/jobsearch). You can also use our "My work plan" template, or keep your records on paper or in a diary.

 

 

So as per the underlined bits, even the literature given to claimants seems to acknowledge that it's optional to record your jobsearch on Jobsmatch, and that a paper based record is still perfectly acceptable. Do they think we're so stupid we haven't noticed that? But all it says is that Jobsmatch is the "best" way. Highly debatable of course, but "best" is still the operative word.

 

What gets me is they have no shame about bull****ting you. I know if I was doing that to clients in a job - even if I was forced to do it by bosses - I'd at least have the grace to be very embarrassed indeed if the client caught me out in that lie. I think they're all robots at this particular JCP because they don't even disagree with you, they just carry on like you haven't spoken. I hope I never have to complain to a manager because I have a feeling it's the manager who's training them to come out with these scripted responses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You also need to keep a record of what you do each week, so you can discuss this when we meet. The best way to record what you've done is to write it down online or on Universal Jobsmatch.

 

All well and good doing it online, but what happens when:

 

  • JCP staff can not access the portal you choose to use...
  • If using the UJM site and if they can't access it due to technical difficulties.
  • The internet fails in your particular part of the world and you have no access.
  • The online database suffers from a failure and your information is corrupted or deleted.

Important data that could lead to financial difficulties should never be entrusted to online storage. Paper based records are quick, easy, and not prone to failure. Even if ink gets smudged, it can be shown that an attempt was used, not so easy with digital data.

 

The other advantage of paper based records is that they take time, effort, and expense to copy.

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

Not to mention that if I really did fit the stereotype of some skiver who needs spying on 24/7, logically I also wouldn't bother neatly writing down what I had done in such vivid detail.

 

The coaches at this JCP aren't very helpful either. I started a (short-lived) restaurant job earlier this week after attending an interview the JCP had told me to attend despite having no experience in that sector at all. It wasn't only the threat of having my UC stopped that made me attend, I also genuinely wanted to try it out to see if I liked it as it was something new. Unfortunately, despite the promise of training, they threw me in at the deep end and expected me to be able to serve customers at the till while simultaneously getting their life story from them, and still completing the transaction in under 10 seconds. (One of those trendy American restaurants where it's not enough to be polite and friendly to the customers, you also have to act like a cheerleader on acid). I couldn't seem to do anything right, and on Thursday I was let go as I wasn't quite the right fit.

 

To be honest, I was mainly relieved as it was a very exhausting job, physically and mentally. All my previous experience is in call centres and offices, where I find it easier to stay calm under pressure because you're on the phone and at least if someone's rude to you, it's easier to fake being cool if they can't see you. So when I attended the Jobcentre on Friday, the coach I saw was reading the notes the contact centre had put on when making the appointment, including the explanation of why this job had ended. And what was the first thing she said? She's got a waitress job she wants me to apply for! FFS. I told her I wasn't refusing to apply, but I had no experience or aptitude for it, they require you to be an excellent multitasker (at which I'm mediocre) and if she keeps sending me for waitressing jobs, the same thing will happen. It might look good on her getting me into work quickly, but if it's a job I only last three days at, that's not very helpful to me, is it? I said "My experience mainly consists of admin, call centre-based customer service and sales; surely you must have jobs like that I can apply for?" She replied "OK, have you thought about being a barmaid?" I swear it went in one ear and out the other!

 

They've also asked me to bring my login details for my Reed and CV Library accounts. They can go eat ****-flavoured cake.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They've also asked me to bring my login details for my Reed and CV Library accounts. They can go eat ****-flavoured cake.

 

Print off a copy of the terms & conditions and highlight the section about sharing user name & passwords. The first rule of internet security is one does not share login details with anyone. Ask the JCP adviser about DWP policy regarding IT security on their internal computers.

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

I said that, and she said it was so she could see what my CV looked like. I actually had a paper copy on me, which she refused to read. I asked why an electronic version was more valid, and she couldn't answer that one; just said I could go and she'd see me when I next attend (Monday 28th).

 

I'm fortunate to be quite naturally forthright and not easily bullied, but it just makes me so angry that they're lying to people who may or may not be aware of their rights. The fact she wouldn't accept the paper version is just proof that they only want to monitor and control you, and they're more interested in that than genuinely helping jobseekers.

 

More to the point, the fact she ignored my experience tells me she doesn't want me to find long term work as then I'd be out of her clutches and it's one less person on the dole. They probably think if everyone found work, they'd be unemployed. Well, not my [edited] problem.

 

Ain't that their attitude to us?

Edited by honeybee13
Paras and language.
Link to post
Share on other sites

You can do a printout of what jobs you have applied for on Reed and CV Library, I kept forestalling the Job Centre on this, one week I was told I had applied for too many jobs and the next time 'why aren't you applying for x job' when I had no skills or exprience for said job...they were quite upset when I proved I already had applied for y and z jobs they came up with via the online links I had. I kept showing them the info I had printed out and they said I should give them my login info. I said it was not necessary as they could call me and I would email the printout to date to them should they need immediate info on my jobsearch activities.

 

This was a while ago now and I found work by myself, by re-writing my cv and putting in my specialist payroll skills.

 

They still seem to think people are 'work shy' and not able to use a computerised system or have 'relevant skills' and try and put you on courses you could deliver better than their providers!

 

Keep up the good work of frustrating them when you can!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just forward my coach the automated confirmation email you get when you've applied, and I only do that if it's one they've matched me to (the only ones they actually check). I have to go to the library to use a printer so I can't really afford to print off half a rainforest. Technically you can give your jobsearch evidence verbally if you want to; it's just most of us don't because most people don't have that sort of photographic memory.

 

What I find interesting about this Jobcentre is, all the members of staff I've spoken to have the Same. Robotic. Manner. When I was on the dole in Birmingham, no two members of DWP staff I met at that office were the same. You got nice ones, nasty ones, sympathetic ones and bored ones. Here, they all use the same technique of ignoring anything you've said that they don't want to hear. It's frustrating.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Went for today's appointment and the coach was nearly 15 minutes late seeing me because she was in a meeting with her manager. I'd have known that without being told as she started nagging me again about using Jobmatch to record my jobsearch activity. She asked for my paper record which I gave her, then she asked me the question when she was halfway through.

 

 

COACH: "Don't you use Universal Jobmatch to record this? You don't have to write it all down."

 

ME: "Writing it down is the easiest way of helping me remember everything I've done, and apart from that the UJ diary has a character limit and it crashes and loses everything when I hit the return key."

 

COACH: "That's fine but everybody has to record their jobsearch in their Jobmatch account. It's the way forward, as I've explained before."

 

ME: "And as I've explained before, that's not what the regulations say. You can record your jobsearch however you choose, and this is the literature I was given at the start of the claim that says you can write it down on paper if you want to. It does say Jobmatch is the best way, but even this acknowledges it's not the only way." (I then showed her the bit I mean.)

 

HER: "That's fine for now but it's checked by the District and it could look like you're not really jobhunting; and it means we can't get in touch to send you job alerts." (I call BS).

 

ME: "If you've got a job you think I should go for, you can email me."

 

HER: "Coaches can't send emails." (Well, coaches have sent me emails with jobs before so she's clearly telling a lie.

 

ME: "Coaches have before."

 

HER: "Was that on Jobseekers' or Universal Credit?" (What difference does that make?)

 

ME (truthfully): "Both."

 

HER: "It's discouraged."

 

ME: "Yes, discouraged. Not forbidden."

 

 

She backed down then, saying it was fine for now but the rules were going to change soon. I'm seeing her again next Monday so I'll ask for a manager if she starts up again. Mind you, it's obvious the manager she was with must have been giving her a hard time and telling her to be tougher on claimants.

 

I phoned up the call centre when I got home to check she hasn't referred me for any unfair sanctions or put anything negative on my notes. The bloke I spoke to said he used to claim himself so he's familiar with the tactics they used, and he refused to allow access to Jobmatch for the same reason. He also assured me they can't legally have you sanctioned behind your back - there are no doubts on my claim and if there were, she would have had to tell me verbally when I was there, which is reassuring.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...