Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 1st again why do you keep changing things before you send them   you've added counterclaim in to our std CPR 31:14 you sent? why? this opens you up to additional costs and I hope you didnt tick counterclaim when you did AOS on mcol too?   also I notice you've  played with our std OD defence above too...   pers I would refrain from continuing to change things as they are written in the frain they are for specific reasons.   your defence is due by 4pm Monday [day 33]   here are 2 versions you will ofcourse need to adapt them to lowells para no's and remove the NOA stuff as your docs show Lowell have complied with those. but don't forget to mention other documents provided to date notably statements contain no proof they came from Lloyds but rather Lowells own internal data system    dx   1. It is admitted with regards to the Defendant entering into an Agreement referred to in the Particulars of Claim ('the Agreement') with the [insert original creditor] . .  2. The defendant denies that the account exceeded the agreed overdraft limit due to overdrawing of funds but is as a result of unfair and extortionate bank charges/penalties being applied to the account. .  3. I refute the claimants claim is owed or payable. The amount claimed is comprised of amongst others default penalties/charges levied on the account for alleged late, missed or over limit payments. The court will be aware that these charge types and the recoverability thereof have been judicially declared to be susceptible to assessments of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 The Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National PLC and others (2009). I will contend at trial that such charges are unfair in their entirety. .  4. It is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer crediticon Act 1974. The Claimant has yet to provide a copy of the Notice of Assignment its claim relies upon. .  5. The claimant is denied from added section 69 interest within the total claimed that as yet to be decided at the courts discretion. .  6. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. .  The claimant is also put to strict proof to:-. .  (a) Provide a copy agreement/facility arrangement along with the Terms and conditions at inception, that this claim is based on.  (b) Provide a copy of the Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand /Recall Notice and Notice of Assignment.  (c) Provide a breakdown of their excessive charging/fees levied to the account with justification.  (d) Show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed.  (e) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.  (f) Show how they have complied with sections III & IV of Practice Direction - Pre-action Conduct. .  7. On receipt of this claim I requested documentation by way of a CPR 31.14 request dated [xxxxxxx] namely the Agreement and Termination Demand Notice referred to in the claimants Particulars of Claim. The Claimant has failed to comply with this request. .  By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief. .  .............. or  Particulars of Claim  1.The claim is for the sum of 2470.56 in respect of monies owing pursuant to an overdraft facility under account number XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX.  2.The debt was legally assigned by Santander UK Plc to the claimant and notice has been served.   3.The Defendant has failed to repay overdrawn sums owing under the terms and conditions of the bank account.   The Claimant claims:  The sum of 2470.56 Interest pursuant to s69 of the county courticon Act 1984 at a rate of 8.00 percent from the 7/04/2015 to the date hereof 14 days is the sum of 7.58Daily interest at the rate of .54  Costs Defence  The Defendant contends that the particulars of the claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.   1. It is admitted with regards to the Defendant once having had banking facilities with the original creditor Santander Bank. It is denied that I am indebted for any alleged balance claimed.   2. Paragraph 2 is denied.I am not aware or ever receiving any Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925. It is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer crediticon Act 1974. The Claimant has yet to provide a copy of the Notice of Assignment its claim relies upon.   3. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Original Creditor has never served notice pursuant to 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974  Any alleged amount claimed could only consist in the main of default penalties/charges levied on the account for alleged late, rejected or over limit payments. The court will be aware that these charge types and the recoverability thereof have been judicially declared to be susceptible to assessments of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 The Office of Fair Trading v Abbeyicon National PLC and others (2009). I will contend at trial that such charges are unfair in their entirety.  4. As per Civil Procedureicon Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.  The claimant is also put to strict proof to:-.  (a) Provide a copy agreement/overdraft facility arrangement along with the Terms and conditions at inception that this claim is based on.  (b) Provide a copy of the Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand /Recall Notice and Notice of Assignment.  (c) Provide a breakdown of all excessive charging/fees and show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed.   (d) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.  (e) Show how they have complied with sections III & IV of Practice Direction - Pre-action Conduct.  5. On receipt of this claim I requested documentation by way of a CPR 31.14 request dated April 2015 namely the Agreement and Termination Demand Notice referred to in the claimants Particulars of Claim. The Claimant has failed to comply with this request.   By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.  Regards  Andy    
    • Hi   Just read your thread and looked at the Docs posted in your PDF.   1. from AST to rent a Car Parking space you need to have signed a Car Parking Agreement for a Space and for visitors you should have asked permission for another space in advance with a fee to pay. (i also assume renting a parking space would be at a cost)   2. You have no signed Car Parking Agreement nor visitor space agreement.   Did you not fully read that AST before you signed it and pick up what is stated about parking and ask them about this Car Parking Agreement and if you need one to park in the car park?   You could formally complain to them about what was verbally said to you but unless you have evidence of this it may be hard to prove.   You should also contact them and ask how you go about renting a Car Parking space/costs and about the Car Parking Agreement also what the process is for a visitor car parking space/costs.   You need to be aware that they could class you and your visitor as illegally parking in there car park without consent nor a signed car parking agreement which they could use as a Breach of your Tenancy Agreement so you need to be careful in how you are approaching this and where you are parking.   Just for info on checking Manchester Life website they have numerous buildings/apartments/car parks but you may be in a building where some of the apartments are leasehold and as part of there leasehold they may have purchased a car parking space in that building. (so how do you know you are not parking in a space that someone in the building has legally purchased?)
    • It converts a forthwith to monthly payment which is set to suit your finances...so if £5 a month so be it...rubber stamped by the court....if you try to negotiate direct ...which it sounds thats what your doing.....they can alter it whenever they feel like it and if you dont comply can execute the judgment...but not if you submit an N245 as advised.   But hey what do we know ? 
    • you still got that spreadsheet I did for you?   dx  
  • Our picks

BarnabyBananaby

prescription Penalty fines - anyone actually been taken to court?

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 231 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi,

 

Just wondering if they finally took you to court or did you appeal to the ombudsman please?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi,

 

Just wondering if they finally took you to court or did you appeal to the ombudsman please?

 

 

Hi. You would be better starting a new thread of your own as the OP hasn't replied to a message from last year.

 

 

HB

Edited by honeybee13
Typo.

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello, yes you are right you most hold back from any fine payment all together and stand strong. The more people who do this the stronger we will be.

 

Let me fully explain all the facts here:

 

This is purely a cost cutting exercise. The most important thing that you should know here is that the political right wing has spread widespread mis information (backed by the newspapers) about benefit fraud. This policy we are talking about here is not about preventing fraud but is one of many examples of Austerity measures to attempt to penalise the poor and charge them for it. The very fact that the organisation has placed full responsibility on the service user for any claim of exemption, telling them they have to know the exemption rules for themselves and for the organisation not to accept any responsibility any form filled out by a claimant is sadly yet another toxic legacy of Margaret Thatcher. This punitive charging policy, like many cost cutting and punitive measures in the taxing/welfare systems: DWP/HMRC is part of that legacy that lives on to this day.

 

Margaret Thatcher started a reactionary politics called Neo-Liberalism, a politics that was to be continued to be pursued by the Conservatives, Lib Dems, UKIP and by New Labour. (The Labour party no longer pursues Neo-Liberalism) One of the defining ideological aspects of Neo -Liberalism is 'Each of us is responsible for ourselves and no-one else is responsible for us' 'The Poor must work out and solve their own problems'

 

The fact that the claimant is told to read the form and work it out for themselves has origins in this ideology.

 

Neo-Liberalism is a form of capitalism was founded by a US business man called Milton Friedman before the 2nd World War. With other business men from around the world, he formed a society in a chalet on the Swiss Mountain Mont Pelerin. It became dominant here in Britain from the 1980's onwards.

 

I too have experienced this policy for myself. Back at the start of 2016 I was asked to sign this form at my dentist surgery, I had been made redundant and was registered as unemployed. On the NHS system I was recorded as exempt and in receipt of an in work benefit. I was told by the woman on reception don't worry. Then several months later the same letter that you are describing was addressed to me. I was on a work placement at the time and I went to the Job Centre to stamp and sign to get full cost exemption. I was quite shaken by this and did not understand why they were doing this. In 2017, I was registered again at the Job Centre. I went to the dentist and filled out the same form myself and ticked the income related benefit. Another letter was addressed to me again. This time saying that there was a reason why I should be paying the full fee, and then saying I should be knowing this for myself.

 

In actual fact the rules for those registered for the income related benefit reflect the rules about how much money they will get weekly based on the abount of savings they have. So effectively a claimant must have the full money being paid to them in order to be fully exempt from NHS dentist fees. Those who only get part of the money or none at all, only the pension contributions, have pay partly of fully towards their treatment.

 

My mother had discovered by accident from a call back from a union rep when I complained to him about. She rang up the NHS centre and got me to get a doctor's note with a £20 fee in order to request fro assistance in that claim which I thought was unacceptable. This has made me feel angry. Had she not got involved I would have myself not agreed to pay anything more than the actual surgery cost.

 

I believe without doubt that this policy has to be resisted by everyone. Have you seen the Ken Loach film 'Daniel Blake'? If not you should find out if you can see it or get the DVD. There needs to be some kind of direct action taken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had an inspection at the dentist a few months back which I wasn't charged for. I never gave it a thought, it was the first or second time I'd been there since I became a pensioner and came off pension credits. I didn't know then I'm supposed to be charged for everything. Later, along comes a fine. I should have paid, they said. I wasn't charged, I said. I should have been and I should have been aware of how much I should have been charged, they said. Well... that's risible so we know these people are idiots straight away. They are saying the practice told them I signed to say I was exempt. That's not how I remember it at all. I asked for evidence. Can I see a copy of this form, I asked, assuming they must have a copy. They say they have nothing they can show me as they were informed digitally. I wish them well in taking me to court then, or indeed anyone else they're trying to blag money from without having any evidence to support their claim. I suspect this may well be why we hear of no-one being taken to court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the paper for treatment has the question on it, they automatically fine you over a period of time that you fail to pay, longer not pay them then the more you will pay, do not flog a dead horse, it will cost you more , in our case wife on £1.48 a week, ( wrong Ji in their eyes, me on a pension, they did not want to know and I took £80 from my pension to pay them how else was she going to pay them,= pay up they are not going to change procedure (more Tory led schemes)

 

Ombudsman what a sick joke.


:mad2::-x:jaw::sad:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not understanding what you're saying here.

 

When you say the paper for treatment has the question on it, do you mean the form you fill in and sign when you go to the dentist?

 

Are you saying they reduced your pension by £80pw?

For how long and why?

How could they do this legally?

Were you taken to court? Have you taken any legal advice about this?

Why do you mention an Ombudsman?

Which one and what did they say or do?

All they've been able to threaten me with is debt collectors.

Why would they treat you differently?

Edited by dx100uk
quote spacing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SWLABR9

 

Think you are reading Old Coggers post incorrectly.

 

They have not said there pension was reduced by £80pw, they have said they took £80 from there pension to pay the fine.

 

If the fine was paid they wold not have been taken to court.

 

Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman: https://www.ombudsman.org.uk/

 

The NHS Counter Fraud Authority (Investigatory Powers and Other Miscellaneous Amendments) Order 2017: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2017/960/made

Edited by stu007

How to Upload Documents/Images on CAG - **INSTRUCTIONS CLICK HERE**

FORUM RULES - Please ensure to read these before posting **FORUM RULES CLICK HERE**

I cannot give any advice by PM - If you provide a link to your Thread then I will be happy to offer advice there.

I advise to the best of my ability, but I am not a qualified professional, benefits lawyer nor Welfare Rights Adviser.

Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you saying there's a government agency which acts as judge and jury all by itself without any trial, and that this agency can issue its own fines?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are you saying there's a government agency which acts as judge and jury all by itself without any trial, and that this agency can issue its own fines?

 

 

 

Yes, there are many.

HMRC, NHS, DWP to name 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are you saying there's a government agency which acts as judge and jury all by itself without any trial, and that this agency can issue its own fines?

 

Is this not a civil penalty ?

 

If you don't pay it and they cannot recover by other means, they can take you to Magistrates.

 

Is this how this works ? Same way as if you did not pay penalty applied by local authority for taking children out of school ?


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Um.. point is, they admit they have no evidence they can show me. I've asked what evidence they have so I can challenge it. It seems I'm being fined, or threatened with a fine, on the basis of what they say the practice said. How do I or anyone know they aren't simply making these unsubstantiated accusations up at random? They're telling me I have to get a letter from the practice denying what they're saying the practice has already said. Er, I have no authority over the practice to compel them to do this. On top of which, it's not my job to establish my innocence, it's theirs to establish my guilt, which obviously, they can't begin to do. This appears to be a government-sanctioned revenue gathering [problem], nothing more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speak to practice manager about this. They should have asked you about your entitlement, before they put the paperwork through.

 

Whenever I have asked for prescriptions or had dental treatments etc, I am always asked whether I am entilted to it for free. On the back of prescriptions are boxes to tick. At Dentists, the receptionists ask the question etc.


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They did know. I know them personally there and we'd chatted about it in passing. Later on, after a couple more visits, I had to explain how an HC3 works as they're only familiar with HC2s :-) But that's by the by, I popped in to advise other CAGgers of this https://uk.trustpilot.com/review/nhsbsa.nhs.uk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I might add, the significant aspect here is that there's no evidence they did put the paperwork through. None at all. They offer no evidence I was anywhere near a dental practice on the date specified either (and I've been careful not to admit it either). So why am I being fined? This is a [problem] and nothing more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A further point, they've threatened me with 'debt recovery proceedings', not debt collectors. Does this have specific legal meaning?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just challenged it online again and this time they've accepted it. Ha! Thanks to all for their assistance and advice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good to know, well done.

 

(I stuck to my gun and that was the last I heard from them)

 

Conclusion: It's worth fighting if you think they're in the wrong. :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...