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

In court soon regarding Benefit fraud


sakwer
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2414 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 there,

I am to appear in court for the housing benefit fraud charges.

 

I claimed housing benefits back in October 2014 while i was working part time.

i became full-time university student in September 2014.

 

when i made claim for housing benefits online,

I mentioned that i am not full-time student.

then benefits started and I ended my part-time job.

 

Housing Benefits never stopped until july 2016 when i was interviewed under caution for benefit fraud.

 

total amount for the housing benefits came up to around £4800.

 

I have completed my degree in may 2017 now i am looking for graduate role.

 

I am very scared and depressed knowing that i had committed fraud.

 

If I plead guilty would I be sent to prison?

 

Not sure what advice to give here.

 

You became a student prior to part time work and you claimed HB after you became a student and whilst working part time and you declared at the time of the claim you weren't a Student?

 

If so then it will be a false from outset case as you made a false statement/declaration.

 

Did you admit the offence at the IUC i.e. the earliest opportunity as this will go in your favour at court and when looking at what sentence to offer?

 

The chances of prison are very slim, especially for £4,800. Likely be a conditional discharge, a fine or a fine and a community order, but it all depends on the judge and how you plead versus the evidence.

 

If you go not guilty you may end up with a worse sentence as from the post it appears you made false statements to obtain the benefit.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

No unfortunately I did not admit the offence at the IUC. As I was very scared of telling them the truth. However, immediately after receiving the letter from DWP for the IUC I told Council that I am full-time student then council had stopped my benefits and asked me to return every single penny they had paid me in HB.

 

You need to get legal advice then. Some places offer 30 mins free or speak with the duty solicitor at court if they have one on the day, but ideally you need to decide what you want to plead before the court date.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From what little you have said, you don't seem to understand the benefit process and what the requirements are to be entitled to receive a benefit. I.e you never intended to set out to deliberately give false information. Then later on you found out that you did not qualify for the benefit and did not know what to do.

 

Although you come across as intelligent, i wonder whether English is your first language and you have failed to understand some of the information advised to you.

 

When you obtain legal advice you must be totally honest with the person you speak to. If they are going to represent you, then they must have all the correct information.

 

I would disagree, OP was a full time student at the time they made the claim, question asked on claim form "are you a full time student" answer "no I am not".

 

It's a straight forward question that they gave a false answer too. How you could answer no to a straightforward answer I cannot see how you could argue ignorance.

 

It's just like the one that asks if you are working and people answer no and then say well I was only doing 20 hours a week didn't think it mattered as it's not full time. The question is normally worded along the lines of "are you doing any paid or unpaid work?".

 

The forms and questions are quite specifically worded so that false/wrong information can only be given deliberately i.e. they only require a yes or no answer which you as the person filling it in would know if it was correct at the time they answered the question.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...