Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Homer67
      H.Samuel - Designed Engagement Ring - Main Gemstone Coming Loose - Paid by CC

      By Homer67 · Posted

      No, do the section 75 chargeback to your credit card provider.
    • honeybee13
      misuse of partners freedom pass

      By honeybee13 · Posted

      See what dx thinks but it seems to me that sending a photo of your own pass isn't relevant to what happened. Let's wait and see what he says. HB
    • worry
      misuse of partners freedom pass

      By worry · Posted

      1st letter image.pdf1st letter 2nd page.pdf
    • Hikertrash
      MET CCTV PNC - Starbucks closed- Southgate Park, Stansted CM24 1PY

      By Hikertrash · Posted

      Many thanks for the replies and advice!   I what to send this email to the Starbucks CEO and the area manager. Your thoughts would be appreciated.   [email protected] [email protected]   Re: MET Parking PNC at your Starbucks Southgate site   Dear Ms Rayner, / Dear Heather Christie,   I have received a Notice to Keeper regarding a Parking Charge Notice of £100 for the driver parking in the Southgate Park Car Park, otherwise infamously known as the Stanstead Starbucks/McDonalds car park(s).   Issued by: MET Parking Services Ltd Parking Charge Notice Number: XXXXXXXXX Vehicle Registration Number: XXXX XXX Date of Contravention: XX.XX.XXXX Time: XX:XX - XX:XX   After a little research it apears that the driver is not alone in being caught in what is commonly described as a scam, and has featured in the national press and on the mainstream television.   It is a shame that the reputation of Starbucks is being tarnished by this, with your customers leaving the lowest possible reviews on Trustpilot and Trip Advisor at this location, and to be associated with what on the face of it appears to be a doubious and predatory car park management company.   In this instance, during the early hours of the morning the driver required a coffee and parked up outside Starbucks with the intention of purchasing one from yourselves. Unfortunately, you were closed so the driver walked to McDonalds next door and ordered a coffee, and for this I have received the Notice to Keeper.   It is claimed that the car park is two separate car parks (Starbucks/McDonalds). However, there is no barrier or road markings to identity a boundary, and the signage in the car park(s) and outside your property is ambiguous, as such the terms would most likely be deemed unfair and unenforcable under the Consumer Rights Act 2015.   I understand that Starbucks-Euro Garages neither operate or benefit from the charges imposed by MET Parking. However, MET Parking is your client.   Additionally, I understand that the charge amount of £100 had previously been upheld in court due to a ‘legitimate interest in making sure that a car park was run as efficiently as possible to benefit other drivers as well as the local stores, keeping cars from overstaying’.   However, this is not applicable when the shop or store is closed (as was the case here), as there is no legitimate interest. Therefore, the amount demanded is a penalty and is punitive, again contravening the Consumer Rights Act 2015.   As the driver’s intention of the visit was genuine, I would be grateful if you could please instruct your client to cancel this Notice to Keeper/Parking Charge Notice.   Kind regards
    • benawhile
      Extra headrest: Do I have to declare this safety mod?

      By benawhile · Posted

      I received the promised call back from the Saga man today who informed me that the undertakers have decreed it IS a modification and they will need to recalculate a quote individually for me. However it all sounds very arbitrary. The more I think about it, and with help from forum replies, the more I am sure that it is not a modification. If for example the original seatback had become damaged by a spillage or a tear, I would be entitled to replace it with the nearest available part. The problem is when it comes to a payout after an accident, there is no telling what an individual insurer will decide when he notices the change. I am still undecided which of the two best routes to go with, either don't mention the replacement at all, or fill in the quote form without mentioning, and when it comes to buying the insurance over the phone, mention it at the time.

  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

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

      BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

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

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld

      ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report

      WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,

      Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
      WanTToMoveOn

      Picked By

      WanTToMoveOn,

    • Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available

      BankFodder posted a post in a topic,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,
    View All

  • Recommended Topics

Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.

Contributory ESA and Pension lump sum

reallymadwoman

By reallymadwoman
in Benefits and HMRC

 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2227 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

reallymadwoman

reallymadwoman

Posted
Posted

Hi all,

As this is probably quite an uncommon question, I don't know if anyone can help.

 

I currently receive ESA contribution based, in the support group. I also have two small pensions which total less than £85 per week so I have no deductions for them.

 

From next month (I will be 55!!!) I will be entitled to a further very small pension which would still keep me below £85 per week total, but I am considering just taking the whole lot as a lump sum (about £15K) to pay off the remaining mortgage. What I'm worried about is how DWP will view this - would it be considered capital and therefore irrelevant as I do not receive income based benefits, or am I likely to have to repeatedly prove I wouldn't have gone over the pension limit if I'd taken the annuity?

 

I am aware that taking the cash now is not likely to be the most tax-efficient or cost effective option.

 

Edit - I've found this fact sheet which I think says the money will be treated as capital, but I do read things wrong so would appreciate other opinions.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/417473/pension-flexibilities-dwp-benefits.pdf

RMW

"If you want my parking space, please take my disability" Common car park sign in France.

Link to post
Share on other sites
ericsbrother

ericsbrother

Posted
Posted

the lump sum is not income so that wont change anything. How they view the use of the capital ias another matter as the law doesnt make it easy to guess what they are thinking. If they decide you have deliberately deprived yourself of the capital they will treat it as still being in your grubby little hands and then make adjustments to your income based upon a 5% interest income on money you don have as well as reducing your benefits as the amount will be over the threshold.. You will have to prove that using the money in this way is allowable and unavoidable ( replacing knackered car with something else that isnt flash is OK, buying a new Bentley isnt).

As for taking the cash being tax efficient, it is as you dont pay tax on the money (at least 25% will be tax free under old and new pension rules and the rest wont get you over the tax threshold) You wont goover the threshold for the lifetime pension pot as this is about a million quid and depending on the scheme annuities dont come into it, that are for personal pension pots that you have set up and not part of a scheme. If it is a stand alone just leave the money where it is as long as the management charges are 1% or less, it will earn a bit of money for you and you can take it any time before you are 75. If the scheme allows take half of it near the end of this tax year and the rest in the next one to make best use of your personal allowance. you will also get past the DWP capital allowance limit. If the scheme doesnt allow this then move the money into one that does. You can do this without attracting the attention of anyone as long as you dont withdraw the money as cash and then reinvest, it must be a transfer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
reallymadwoman

reallymadwoman

Posted
  • Author
Posted
the lump sum is not income so that wont change anything. How they view the use of the capital ias another matter as the law doesnt make it easy to guess what they are thinking. If they decide you have deliberately deprived yourself of the capital they will treat it as still being in your grubby little hands and then make adjustments to your income based upon a 5% interest income on money you don have as well as reducing your benefits as the amount will be over the threshold.. You will have to prove that using the money in this way is allowable and unavoidable ( replacing knackered car with something else that isnt flash is OK, buying a new Bentley isnt).

Sorry, I don't understand this - where would any suggestion of 'deprivation of capital' come in if I don't receive income based benefits?

As for taking the cash being tax efficient, it is as you dont pay tax on the money (at least 25% will be tax free under old and new pension rules and the rest wont get you over the tax threshold) You wont goover the threshold for the lifetime pension pot as this is about a million quid and depending on the scheme annuities dont come into it, that are for personal pension pots that you have set up and not part of a scheme. If it is a stand alone just leave the money where it is as long as the management charges are 1% or less, it will earn a bit of money for you and you can take it any time before you are 75. If the scheme allows take half of it near the end of this tax year and the rest in the next one to make best use of your personal allowance. you will also get past the DWP capital allowance limit. If the scheme doesnt allow this then move the money into one that does. You can do this without attracting the attention of anyone as long as you dont withdraw the money as cash and then reinvest, it must be a transfer.

 

I already pay tax unfortunately, so it won't make any difference how many lumps I take the money in. Also, it turns out I would have to live a very long time to have been better off not taking the cash to pay off the mortgage now and taking the annuity now or at any time in the next 10 years based on what they were planning to pay me.

RMW

"If you want my parking space, please take my disability" Common car park sign in France.

Link to post
Share on other sites
AndyOrch

AndyOrch

Posted
Posted

 

:thumb:

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites
ericsbrother

ericsbrother

Posted
Posted

I didnt say take an annuity, that is the last thing you should do. I said take the money as 2 lump sums in different tax years so you make best use of any residual tax allowances. If your income is above £11.4k then you dont need to do this as there will be no benefit. Capital earns a notional income of 5% so if you do cash it in use it quickly for the indicated purpose or they will assume that you are getting a return of £15pw from it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 10 months later...
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...