Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Help - didn't inform DWP i was Working i have probably had a £900 over payment


vialli69
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3038 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, Please don't judge.

 

After being made redundant for the 4th time in 5 years.

I started signing on in September 2015.

I took a trial self employed position with a company back in December 2015

and was working around 12 hours a week

 

 

i never declared this to the DWP as i hated the job and after 7 weeks i quit.

 

This morning i received a letter form the DWP asking for me to come in for a interview>

 

 

It reads "we are reviewing your benefit claim"

Come to your meeting to keep us up to date.

I called the number on the letter and it was from a women who works n the fraud and error department.

 

I Have probably shot myself in the foot as i just the called the main phone line

and have signed off and have decided to start my own business sooner than i wanted,

 

My questions is now that i have signed off and no longer need to attend this interview. will that be that ? .

 

 

I know i have behaved badly and i feel sick with guilt and i have probably had a £900 over payment

Link to post
Share on other sites

Relax, have a read around and see how many hours you are 'permitted' to work whilst claiming social security.

 

Don't beat yourself up about it, god knows that this department isn't racked with guilt or worry about the thousands of claimants they have killed.

 

I think? off the top of my noggin? that you're allowed to work 16 hours a week and still be in receipt of social security.

 

The interrogation was quite likely a random one, to ensure you were getting all that you were entitled to.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

First off, £900 isn't really that much in the grand scheme of things. You may not even have been overpaid that much: since you were only working 12 hours per week you didn't automatically lose your entitlement to JSA. If you earned less than your weekly JSA amount (plus £5 if you're single, £10 if your claim was a couple claim) then you might have been entitled to the difference as JSA provided you met all the general conditions of entitlement - you were signing on and actively seeking work during that time.

 

However, signing off will not make this go away. You did, after all, fail to declare a change in your circumstances which, as you are aware, would have affected your entitlement. I'd advise you to attend the interview and explain the situation honestly. Easier said than done, I realise, but it's the best and safest thing to do in the long run.

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

You might want to wait until you know why they actually wanted to see you before admitting fraud. It might have been a standard letter where they review your a claim ask for proof of who you are and you sign a form to say nothing has changed. Don't fret until you need to do so.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are shooting yourself in the foot again. Not going to the interview could cause them to trawl through their records for about 7 years, checking every single piece of information they have - and they could demand to see your bank account for the last three or four years.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are shooting yourself in the foot again. Not going to the interview could cause them to trawl through their records for about 7 years, checking every single piece of information they have - and they could demand to see your bank account for the last three or four years.

 

For £900 you won't face court. It sounds as if they are treating this as a compliance matter. I suggest you ring the compliance officer & discuss it. Just because you have signed off, it won't go away. These things have a habit of snowballing if left.

 

Sort it out and then move on. Hope the new job works out

Please do not ask me for advice via PM as I will not reply.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You might want to wait until you know why they actually wanted to see you before admitting fraud. It might have been a standard letter where they review your a claim ask for proof of who you are and you sign a form to say nothing has changed. Don't fret until you need to do so.

 

It's possible, of course, that this interview is about an entirely unrelated matter, but under no circumstances should anyone sign a form that says "I have nothing else I need to declare" when they do in fact have something that they need to declare. I would never advise anyone to ignore something like this and hope that it goes away: it will come up eventually. Might as well get it sorted now while it's a relatively minor problem.

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

It's possible, of course, that this interview is about an entirely unrelated matter, but under no circumstances should anyone sign a form that says "I have nothing else I need to declare" when they do in fact have something that they need to declare. I would never advise anyone to ignore something like this and hope that it goes away: it will come up eventually. Might as well get it sorted now while it's a relatively minor problem.

 

This is true I was merely pointing out that this could have been a review where at the end of the interview they ask you to sign a form. I was not advising on any particular action as this is to be determined by the OP himself at the relevant time

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok let's look at this in a different way. If you failed to notify a change of circumstances correctly you can be overpaid.

 

If indeed this was an oversight or deliberate doesn't matter at this moment.

 

The DWP can make an attachment of earnings without getting a court order. Then you new employer will know you have a benefit overpayment. They may make an assumption it was fraud. You may lose the new job. ( the new employer may make the wrong assumption but will worry you may not be an honest person).

 

Just offering a different view and nothing more and letting you know the DWP can still reclaim the overpayment...

If I have been of any help, please click on my star and leave a note to let me know, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've spoken to two different solicitors One says do not attend the other says to phone them.

 

I'm very confused

 

Why not ring them and ask them? Say that you're no longer claiming social security and is there any need to go in for this interview?

 

If they say yes, then so be it, you go in, and will probably be back out in under five minutes when they see you're no longer in receipt of any social security.

 

If they say no, then ask them to send it you in writing for your records. If you don't receive any correspondence from them to the contrary then I would be very much inclined to attend this interview, this does not sound like it is an IUC (interview under caution) just a standard randomly plucked 'compliance interview'.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...