Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I see that at the start of your thread you said they hadn't sent a Letter of Claim.  And in fact in all the uploaded material there is no LoC.  This is great news.  Even were you to lose - you won't - the judge would chop off a chunk of the money for their non-respect of PAPLOC. However, I'm a bit confused as you've named the file name as a SAR.  Are you sure about this?  Did you send any other letters apart from the one dx advised which was a CPR request (not a SAR) to DCBL (not Group Nexus).  I'm not being pernickety, this will be important for your Witness Statement further down the line.
    • I didn’t say it wouldn’t. That is not the issue here. To continue driving after the licence has expired (under s88), the driver must have submitted a “qualifying application”.  An application disclosing a relevant medical condition (of which sleep apnoea is one) is not a “qualifying application”, This means the driver cannot take advantage of s88 and must wait for the DVLA to make its decision before resuming driving. The driver’s belief is irrelevant. The fact that a licence was eventually granted may mitigate the offence, but  does it does not provide a defence. But this driver didn’t meet the conditions. I explained why in my earlier post. He only meets the conditions if his application does not declare a relevant medical condition. His did. As I explained, after his birthday he did not hold a licence that could be revoked. In my view it doesn’t matter what it says. The offence is committed because his application declared a medical condition. Meanwhile his licence expired and s88 is not available to him. The GP letter would form part of the material the DVLA would use to complete their investigations. But until those enquiries are completed he could not drive. The offence does not carry points or a disqualification (because a licence could have been held by your father). It only carries a fine and the guideline is half a week’s net income. If he pleads guilty that fine will be reduced by a third. He will also pay a surcharge of 40% of that fine. But the big difference is prosecution costs: a guilty plea will see costs of about £90 ordered whilst being convicted following a trial will see costs in the region of £600.
    • I'd recommend getting a new thread started about this. Let us help!
  • 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

Administrative penalty notice- how do they expect us to pay?


dragon29
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2547 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

I don't understand still. So we won't have all of the money taken off us?

 

Please can someone clear it up?

 

The overpayment is recovered in full, by weekly deduction. Once that has been recovered the deductions will continue until the ad pen amount has been recovered.

 

Any prescribed benefits end for 4 weeks in addition.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 88
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

so she won't be sanctioned until everything been recovered including ad pen? so could take over a year before she gets sanctioned which gives her time to put money aside before she loses benefits for 4 weeks?

Link to post
Share on other sites

No I think they mean 4 weeks immediately

 

So just so I've got this straight

 

During the 4 weeks that they will sanction us - the £44 a month would be paid automatically as part of the sanction?

 

There would be nothing in my bank account to pay it otherwise.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No. It just means the recovery won't happen for those 4 weeks as you don't have any benefits.

 

You don't have to accept the ad pen. You could decline and see if they do prosecute but if you do that, take legal advice first: only a legal adviser with the full facts can fully advise you what is in your best interests.

 

Yes, the 4 weeks are immediate

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not having read all of the information for this case, it is difficult to comment.

 

But i would make this observation.

 

If they would struggle to live with just the deduction to benefits to pay back the excess benefits received, applying this administrative penalty and sanction of 4 weeks without benefits, is only ever going to make the situation worse.

 

This is very poorly worked out by DWP and cannot have been a commonsense decision. I find the lack of an appeals process for the administrative penalty as a disturbing aspect, particularly if those concerned have suffered from mental health.

 

Personally, if it were me, if the overpayment of benefits was not an attempt to defaud DWP and was simply due to circumstances that can be explained, i would reject the administrative penalty by writing to DWP. I would send a copy to my local MP, with a covering note that i would like the MP to intervene on my behalf, as DWP do not offer an appeals process. Obviously wait until the new MP is decided on Thursday.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't disagree.

 

The reason there is no right of appeal is because you can simply decline the ad pen. Then they will need to make a decision regarding prosecution or not.

 

If convicted the loss of benefit is longer and they sting you for court costs.

 

 

So that's the risk, which is why advice should be sought from someone that has all the facts before you make a decision.

 

 

They may well decide that it's not in the public interest to prosecute

- the file may make it all the way to the CPS and then they decide that.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't disagree.

 

The reason there is no right of appeal is because you can simply decline the ad pen. Then they will need to make a decision regarding prosecution or not.

 

If convicted the loss of benefit is longer and they sting you for court costs.

 

 

So that's the risk, which is why advice should be sought from someone that has all the facts before you make a decision.

 

 

They may well decide that it's not in the public interest to prosecute

- the file may make it all the way to the CPS and then they decide that.

 

So it's a bit of a lottery really as to whether if I decline it they'll take me to court and it'll be a lot worse or I just accept it and lose 4 weeks benefit

 

I seriously don't know what to do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not having read all of the information for this case, it is difficult to comment.

 

But i would make this observation.

 

If they would struggle to live with just the deduction to benefits to pay back the excess benefits received, applying this administrative penalty and sanction of 4 weeks without benefits, is only ever going to make the situation worse.

 

This is very poorly worked out by DWP and cannot have been a commonsense decision. I find the lack of an appeals process for the administrative penalty as a disturbing aspect, particularly if those concerned have suffered from mental health.

 

Personally, if it were me, if the overpayment of benefits was not an attempt to defaud DWP and was simply due to circumstances that can be explained, i would reject the administrative penalty by writing to DWP. I would send a copy to my local MP, with a covering note that i would like the MP to intervene on my behalf, as DWP do not offer an appeals process. Obviously wait until the new MP is decided on Thursday.

 

Well it will be £44 a month off our benefits starting on the 16th of this month. We struggle to live now but we get by somehow.

 

If I decline the adpen then it gets taken to court and I'm prosecuted I could go to prison. I just couldn't risk that. I really don't know what to do.

 

I have an interview on the 14th where they are going to explain the situation to me.

 

I was going to send them a letter stating that they really haven't looked at my case and my mitigating circumstances before making a decision and that I don't think in the eyes of the law that is fair. I think it's heartless because I have mental health problems. Why should I become a statistic just to make their quota when I had no intentions of defrauding the DWP and that it was simply due to my mitigating circumstances which are on tape. I don't think there's much point sending that letter now after everything everyone has said.

 

I always want to follow the law and if accepting this adpen means not going to jail I'll do it.

 

This is seriously affecting my mental health. I've hardly been able to sleep since receiving this. My depression and anxiety have both gone sky high. My partner who is also mentally unwell has been affected too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you decline and get prosecuted you won't go to jail. They most likely sentence is either a fine,curfew if you're unable to do unpaid work or simply give you a conditional discharge and only pay court costs. The overpayment is low and there was no intent and you are of good character a prison sentence won't even cross their minds. If you decline and get prosecuted, i would be more concerned with my name in the paper and people judging me. Accept it and apply for hardship.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you decline and get prosecuted you won't go to jail. They most likely sentence is either a fine,curfew if you're unable to do unpaid work or simply give you a conditional discharge and only pay court costs. The overpayment is low and there was no intent and you are of good character a prison sentence won't even cross their minds. If you decline and get prosecuted, i would be more concerned with my name in the paper and people judging me. Accept it and apply for hardship.

 

Yes that's a massive worry too! I think I'll accept it and apply for hardship. They can only say no.

 

Thanks a lot for all your help. Sorry for being mean to you a couple of days ago. My anxiety was massively high having just received the letter. I really appreciate all of your help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So it's a bit of a lottery really as to whether if I decline it they'll take me to court and it'll be a lot worse or I just accept it and lose 4 weeks benefit

 

I seriously don't know what to do.

 

It's very likely prosecution will be recommended by the team leader. However the CPS might well reject the case.

 

I think you need to take advice before you make a decision.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a few more questions if I may

 

1) The repayments were meant to start with our benefit which was paid today. They deducted £2.20 from our benefits today.

The weird thing is we got a letter first of all saying they were going to take £1.10 per week. This is in line with what we have been reduced by.

We also got another letter the following day saying they were going to take £11.20 per week.

 

I'm just a bit confused as to which one is right and wanted to get your opinions before I chased it up.

 

2) The 4 weeks we aren't going to get benefit (we've decided to accept the adpen after much consideration) we've sorted out how we are going to get by.

 

I'm also a bit confused by the wording of this too (I get confused a lot)

 

What is the definition of 4 weeks in this sense?

 

Is it two payments as we get paid fortnightly or 4 payments?

 

Interview is on Thursday so I could ask then but I wanted to get the opinion of you all.

 

Thank you very much for all your help!

Link to post
Share on other sites

In your post dated 5th June, you said that your interview is on the 14th, then in your post today, you have said the interview is on Thursday, which is the 15th.

 

 

I just wanted to point that out to you as if you have got your dates/days mixed up you could well turn up on the wrong day, and that wouldn't be very good.

 

 

Sorry I cannot offer any advice on the rest of your questions.

 

 

I hope all goes well for you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...