Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • In my experience (not with car payments) but with many other things, my partner has been ill and signed off in the past and we have been unable to meet various commitments.  Naturally if you ring the call centre they are going to fob you off and tell you you must pay, that's why that never ever works. I would obtain a note from her GP listing all her health issues plus medications plus side effects, then write to the finance company with a copy of it, explaining the situation, as you have here, asking for a payment holiday. Perhaps mention that the car is very much needed for hospital appointments etc. It's likely the finance company would rather you pay till term end than, chase you for money they will never see, and sell the car at auction for a loss,  You can search some of my threads going back years, advising people to do this for Council Tax, Tax Credits, HMRC, Even a solicitors company and it always works, because contrary to popular belief people are reasonable.
    • Sorry, I haven't ever seen one of these agreements. Read it all and look out for anything that says when she can withdraw and when she is committed to go ahead. If it isn't clear she may need to call the housing provider and simply say what you posted here, she doesn't want to go ahead and how does she withdraw her swap application?
    • Thank you! Your head is like a power bank of knowledge.  Her health issues are short term, due to a relationship breakdown she took it pretty hard and has been signed off work on medication for 3 months. She only started her job in February 24 so does not qualify for any occupational sick benefits, which is where the ssp only comes in. (You will see me posting a few things over the coming days, whilst I try and sort some things for her)  I sat with her last night relaying all this back and she does want to work out a plan, she was ready to propose £100 for the next 3 months and then an additional £70 per month onto of her contractual to "catch up" but Money247 rejecting the payment holiday and demanding £200 thew her, which is why I came on here.   
    • I've looked at your case specifically more.   Term 8bii reads " when, in accordance with instructions from the Customer or the Consignee, the Consignment is left in a safe place" Their terms choose to not define safe, so they are put to proof that the location is safe. If your property opens onto a street its a simple thing of putting a google earth image and pointing out that its not a safe place
    • New rules and higher rates resulted in a jump in the number of savers opening accounts at the start of this year's Isa season.View the full article
  • 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

jsa - automatic 12 weeks daily contact for all new claims


ruspj
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2591 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

I recently finished a full time course at the end of january and started signing on to job seekers allowance while looking for work.

 

At the first meeting at the job centre before anything else was discussed i was told that at the start of all new claims there is a mandatory 12 weeks of daily contact.

After questioning this i was told that this is a national policy for all new claims.

 

although im not attending every day i'm getting appointments to attend 2 or 3 times per week and must email my job search activity, jobs applied for, and forward all email responses from applications.

 

i was told this was to help me find work

but after almost 2 months all it has involved is keeping them updated on my work search activity with no help whatsoever towards finding work.

 

after searching online i cant find anything about a mandatory 12 weeks of daily contact for all new claims so suspect that it is just some local thing.

 

can anyone let me know if this is a national or local scheme?

 

i expect that things like this are intended for people who who need help or encouragement towards looking for work rather than everybody, and as i was placed on this before anything else was discussed they have no reasons whatsoever to suspect that i might need this extra attention.

 

Is there any national criteria to determine who gets placed on this daily contact which i could use to complain & be placed on the normal fortnightly signing?

Edited by ruspj
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like BS from some overzealous work coach to me, Whilst they can mandate you to sign daily, this inst normal practice, Have they mandated you to do this and given you a formal letter backing this up?

Edited by Mr.P
Try not to denegrate JCP staff please, some of them help out here.
Link to post
Share on other sites

hmm

no formal letter about it

nothing whatsoever about it in writing

thinking mabee worth telling them that i refuse to unless its in writing & an afficial instruction to attend (i think its called a direction or something like that)

Link to post
Share on other sites

just sent my daily email asking for a direction if she wants me continue with the daily contact

including that i was told that it was to help me find work & instead i have just been onforming them of worksearch activities.

 

recently qualifying in computer security after 3 years of study & i know i'm entiteled to stick to searching in this area for 12 weeks

annoying thst the only help i get is the suggestion that i find unskilled work while looking

Link to post
Share on other sites

If it is policy then there must be a policy document. Ask to see it. If there is a problem then do an FOI

Link to post
Share on other sites

Permitted periods are not automatic for job searching so unless you have been actively employed in that field for at least 2 years you can't just stick to one area and you will be expected to search for all work that you are capable and qualified to do.

When I left the JCP last year there was something coming in about mandatory contact but I haven't kept upto date with it sorry as I'm in another field now. The contact could be however you and your work coach deem acceptable, it could be by telephone, email, job clubs, training sessions, work experience or face to face appointments when I left but don't know if that has changed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks i realised after posting and looking for details online that this Permitted periods is not automatic but i was told that i could concentrate in that area for 12 weeks when i started signing.

i seem to be finding a reasonable ammount of work in computing to apply for.

after searching online & i cant find any changes in regulations or policies saying there should be mandatory contact or even any suggestion that it is hapening other than a few articles on sites like the guardian saying it might be used for long term unemployed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hmm

no formal letter about it

nothing whatsoever about it in writing

thinking mabee worth telling them that i refuse to unless its in writing & an afficial instruction to attend (i think its called a direction or something like that)

yes mandated by way of a jobseeker's direction is what they call it,
Link to post
Share on other sites

or it goes on your claimant commitment that you will attend daily or have daily contact in one form or another.
which you are supposed to able to agree or not agree on, I didn't even sign a few of the cc's they gave me
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you don't agree with a claimant commitment you can dispute it, you then have to construct a version that you think is reasonable and the two versions are sent to the DMA team to consider both versions. I've seen a few of them sent away and seen both outcomes so before anyone tries to say that DMA will simply take the JCP staff CC that is not the case.

Also if the CC is not signed then it is not valid but old versions are not retained electronically so keep any paper copies that you have in case you need to submit as evidence.

 

Directions are not used as much now as the CC is supposed to be updated at each work search interview (not work search review) , it is a living document and a direction is only supposed to be used if a claimant is not following the agreed steps on the CC and it is something that is reasonable to help them towards employment. A direction is really the last resort.

Edited by flumps1976
extra info
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you don't agree with a claimant commitment you can dispute it, you then have to construct a version that you think is reasonable and the two versions are sent to the DMA team to consider both versions. I've seen a few of them sent away and seen both outcomes so before anyone tries to say that DMA will simply take the JCP staff CC that is not the case.

Also if the CC is not signed then it is not valid but old versions are not retained electronically so keep any paper copies that you have in case you need to submit as evidence.

 

Directions are not used as much now as the CC is supposed to be updated at each work search interview (not work search review) , it is a living document and a direction is only supposed to be used if a claimant is not following the agreed steps on the CC and it is something that is reasonable to help them towards employment. A direction is really the last resort.

They didn't hesitate in issuing me with a jobseeker's direction to create a UJ account because i pointed out it was not mandatory,
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...