Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Concentrix tax credits investigation: complicated situation. Help requested.


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2915 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

Hello, I'm new here and looking for help if possible.

 

I was claiming tax credits as part of a couple with my husband until June 2015 when he left the family home.

We had decided to separate with a view to divorcing and had put the house on the market,

 

 

as soon as he actually moved out I rang tax credits to inform them.

I should point out here that my husband DID NOT WORK and had not been working at any point during the claim period

(one of the reasons for our separation).

 

 

I was the sole earner and continued to be when he left.

He never paid me any maintenance as he had no income.

 

Our previous mortgage was in joint names but I bought a new home for myself and our children in my name

and my husband signed over the equity from the previous property during the sale

as I had always paid the mortgage during our marriage anyway.

I moved house in August 2015, all bills were in my name etc.

 

In November 2015 I had a nervous breakdown and went on long term sick leave from work.

I was struggling to cope with the children alone.

 

 

My mum moved in to help me but was working full time.

Eventually in January 2016 my husband came to stay for a fortnight to help

and finally secured a job for himself as I needed to leave work indefinitely due to my health.

 

 

I therefore agreed that he should move back in to the family home

and I asked him to ring tax credits to inform them.

 

 

Tax credits said we would need to end the single claim and begin a joint claim which we did

(the same week he moved back in). The joint claim has been active since.

 

I have now received a letter from concentrix stating they think another adult lives with me

and I needed to send a long list of documents, which confused me.

 

 

I called up to speak to someone who was disinterested,

didn't even take my personal details or look at my individual case

and told me that it would only concern the period of the single claim (June 2015- January 2016)

so I should send documents for this period.

 

We had sold the house when my husband left in June and I had bought a new home on my own,

therefore we did not change any of the bills at that time (June-August).

 

 

The mortgage was joint (and could not be changed),

the electricity and gas were in his name.

 

 

I did call them to ask if I could start a new account in my name

and was told that I couldn't as there were big arrears on his account (which I hadn't known about).

 

 

I just left it as the house move was imminent and I did not want to take on that debt as my own!

I cannot provide a bill as they were in his name and he no longer has them (although he could ask for copies).

The water bill was in joint names until I moved too.

 

As soon as I moved here in August everything was in my name only

but as my husband had no fixed address he had given the electricity/gas company this address to send correspondence about the money still owed.

 

 

The account was no longer live,

it was just arrears,

but I wonder if this triggered their 'investigation.'

 

 

Either that or the fact he earned some money between Feb and April this year

when he hadn't been earning previously (but we were on a joint claim then anyway).

 

I can provide bank statements (although i have no idea how these prove anything),

as well as utilities bills and council tax bill from this house from August onwards etc

and they should clearly be able to see that my husband did not change his bank account

or driving license address or regsister on the electoral roll until he moved back in.

 

I suppose what I'm wondering is:

 

Do I send a covering letter explaining all of this and hope for the best?

 

If I leave out any of the evidence but explain why, will they refuse to look at my case?

 

If they decide that they are not happy with the evidence for any period, what happens next?

 

Can they stop the current joint claim based on this investigation as it is a separate claim

and we are in financial hardship on a low income?

 

If they decide that in their view,

the claim should still have been joint even when we lived apart because we were married

and eventually reconciled, would they demand back ALL the money they paid me between june and January

or would it be the difference between what they would have paid for a joint or single claim?

(which would be nothing anyway!)

 

What is frustrating is that until February 2016,

my husband did not have any income so I did not financially benefit in any way from the single claim

as the single persons element is the same as the couples element anyway.

 

 

It would make no sense for me to have fraudulently claimed as a single person

because there was no benefit to me.

 

 

I've read horror stories about this company.

If they tried to claim back the entire amount I was paid simply based on their own 'assumption',

I wouldn't be able to backdate the joint claim so could they really insist I pay back 8 months of money

that they know I would still have been entitled to either way?

 

I am worried sick,

I am still being treated for depression and anxiety and receiving counselling

and I feel guilty when I've done nothing wrong,

and terrified of sending them my bank statements so they can analyse everything I ever spent.

 

 

Some friends have told me to refuse to send bank statements as they are personal

but I'm worried that if I don't, they will punish me.

 

 

There is nothing on my bank statements relating to my husband, no payments between us or anything else,

but I just feel horrible about them rifling through my private financial affairs that way

and worried because my mum has put money into my account for me to help me towards the bills,

is she allowed to help me that way?

Link to post
Share on other sites

don't worry too much about it

 

 

they send out 1000's of these letters

 

 

I would read a good few threads here on them.

 

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?439253-439253&p=4680875#post4680875

start with this one.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...