Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yep, I read that and thought about trying to find out what the consideration and grace period is at Riverside but not sure I can. I know they say "You must tell us the specific consideration/grace period at a site if our compliance team or our agents ask what it is"  but I doubt they would disclose it to the public, maybe I should have asked in my CPR 31.14 letter? Yes, I think I can get rid of 5 minutes. I am also going to include a point about BPA CoP: 13.2 The reference to a consideration period in 13.1 shall not apply where a parking event takes place. I think that is Deception .... They giveth with one hand and taketh away with the other!
    • Six months of conflict have also taken a heavy economic toll.View the full article
    • the Town and Country [advertisments ] Regulations 2007 are not easy to understand. Most Council planing officials don't so it's good that you found one who knows. Although he may not have been right if the rogues have not been "controlling" in the car park for that long. The time only starts when the ANPR signs go up, not how long the area has been used as a car park.   Sadly I have checked Highview out and they have been there since at least 2014 . I have looked at the BPA Code of Practice version 8 which covers 2023 and that states Re Consideration and Grace Periods 13.3 Where a parking location is one where a limited period of parking is permitted, or where drivers contract to park for a defined period and pay for that service in advance (Pay & Display), this would be considered as a parking event and a Grace Period of at least 10 minutes must be added to the end of a parking event before you issue a PCN. It then goes on to explain a bit more further down 13.5 You must tell us the specific consideration/grace period at a site if our compliance team or our agents ask what it is. 13.6 Neither a consideration period or a grace period are periods of free parking and there is no requirement for you to offer an additional allowance on top of a consideration or grace period. _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________So you have  now only overstayed 5 minutes maximum since BPA quote a minimum of 10 minutes. And it may be that the Riverside does have a longer period perhaps because of the size of the car park? So it becomes even more incumbent on you to remember where the extra 5 minutes could be.  Were you travelling as a family with children or a disabled person where getting them in and out of the car would take longer. Was there difficulty finding a space, or having to queue to get out of the car park . Or anything else that could account for another 5 minutes  without having to claim the difference between the ANPR times and the actual times.
    • Regarding a driver, that HAS paid for parking but input an incorrect Vehicle Registration Number.   This is an easy mistake to make, especially if a driver has access to more than one vehicle. First of all, upon receiving an NTK/PCN it is important to check that the Notice fully complies with PoFA 2012 Schedule 4 before deciding how to respond of course. The general advice is NOT to appeal to the Private Parking Company as, for example, you may identify yourself as driver and in certain circumstances that could harm your defence at a later stage. However, after following a recent thread on this subject, I have come to the conclusion that, in the case of inputting an incorrect Vehicle Registration Number, which is covered by “de minimis” it may actually HARM your defence at a later stage if you have not appealed to the PPC at the first appeal stage and explained that you DID pay for parking and CAN provide proof of parking, it was just that an incorrect VRN was input in error. Now, we all know that the BPA Code of Practice are guidelines from one bunch of charlatans for another bunch of charlatans to follow, but my thoughts are that there could be problems in court if a judge decides that a motorist has not followed these guidelines and has not made an appeal at the first appeal stage, therefore attempting to resolve the situation before it reaches court. From BPA Code of Practice: Section 17:  Keying Errors B) Major Keying Errors Examples of a major keying error could include: • Motorist entered their spouse’s car registration • Motorist entered something completely unrelated to their registration • Motorist made multiple keying errors (beyond one character being entered incorrectly) • Motorist has only entered a small part of their VRM, for example the first three digits In these instances we would expect that such errors are dealt with appropriately at the first appeal stage, especially if it can be proven that the motorist has paid for the parking event or that the motorist attempted to enter their VRM or were a legitimate user of the car park (eg a hospital patient or a patron of a restaurant). It is appreciated that in issuing a PCN in these instances, the operator will have incurred charges including but not limited to the DVLA fee and other processing costs therefore we believe that it is reasonable to seek to recover some of these costs by making a modest charge to the motorist of no more than £20 for a 14-day period from when the keying error was identified before reverting to the charge amount at the point of appeal. Now, we know that the "modest charge" is unenforceable in law, however, it would be up to the individual if they wanted to pay and make the problem go away or in fact if they wanted to contest the issue in court. If the motorist DOES appeal to the PPC explaining the error and the PPC rejects the appeal and the appeal fails, the motorist can use that in his favour at court.   Defence: "I entered the wrong VRN by mistake Judge, I explained this and I also submitted proof of payment for the relevant parking period in my appeal but the PPC wouldn't accept that"   If the motorist DOES NOT appeal to the PPC in the first instance the judge may well use that as a reason to dismiss the case in the claimant's favour because they may decide that they had the opportunity to resolve the matter at a much earlier stage in the proceedings. It is my humble opinion that a motorist, having paid and having proof of payment but entering the wrong VRN, should make an appeal at the first appeal stage in order to prevent problems at a later stage. In this instance, I think there is nothing to be gained by concealing the identity of the driver, especially if at a later stage, perhaps in court, it is said: “I (the driver) entered the wrong VRN.” Whether you agree or not, it is up to the individual to decide …. but worth thinking about. Any feedback, especially if you can prove to the contrary, gratefully received.
    • Women-only co-working spaces are part of the new hybrid working landscape, but they divide opinion.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

Dependence on prescription medicines linked to deprivation


stu007
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1670 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

Dependence on prescription medicines linked to deprivation

 

Quote

PHE has published the first-ever evidence review of dependence and withdrawal problems associated with 5 commonly prescribed classes of medicines in England.

 

The Prescribed medicines review assesses the scale and distribution of prescribed medicines – and makes recommendations for better monitoring, treatment and support for patients.

 

It uses available prescriptions data, a literature review and reports of patients’ experiences.

 

A total of 5 classes of medicines were included in the review:

 

-- benzodiazepines (mainly prescribed for anxiety and insomnia)

-- Z-drugs (insomnia)

-- gabapentinoids (neuropathic pain)

-- opioid pain medications (for chronic non-cancer pain such as low back pain and injury-related and degenerative joint disease)

-- antidepressants (depression)

 

READ MORE HEREhttps://www.gov.uk/government/news/dependence-on-prescription-medicines-linked-to-deprivation

How to Upload Documents/Images on CAG - **INSTRUCTIONS CLICK HERE**

FORUM RULES - Please ensure to read these before posting **FORUM RULES CLICK HERE**

I cannot give any advice by PM - If you provide a link to your Thread then I will be happy to offer advice there.

I advise to the best of my ability, but I am not a qualified professional, benefits lawyer nor Welfare Rights Adviser.

Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

Note that these are the medications that GPs will prescribe for anything you go to them.

I always questioned why I needed to take antidepressants for back pain and their best answer was: they block the brain from feeling pain.

In other words, we make you stupid and in the mean time as you don't understand that you have pain, you damage your back further. 

Never touched that stuff.

When I decided nhs was not for me I found that private consultants don't prescribe many medications,  but have a better approach in trying to fix the cause of the pain rather than mask the effects with drugs switching your brain off.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, some major assumption there.

 

Firstly that the meds will mean you will become so insensitive to pain that you will cause further injury : unlikely.

 

Secondly that the antidepressant make you “stupid” (and / or that they are being used as an antidepressant at all!)

Low dose amitryptyline is indeed used for back pain (and at doses below those used for its antidepressant effect)

https://www.nhs.uk/medicines/amitriptyline-for-pain/

 

They probably worked out you were dismissive, so didn’t bother going into detail if they felt you weren’t listening or willing to try it anyhow.

 

Then again, what does your GP know, anyway?.

5 years of med school, at least 5 years post qualification, and then any number of years once a fully qualified GP. Yet, you know better.

 

it doesn’t “switch your brain off”. Mind you, from some of your posts .....

Edited by BazzaS
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, if you could read for longer than 6 seconds you would have got to the point in which I said I never took those drugs.

So all that comes from me is a natural talent 😂

Also, you could have noticed that consultants (possibly more qualified than GPs?) looked and found a solution to the root of the problem,  not some masking palliative to turn off the pain.

32 minutes ago, BazzaS said:

Firstly that the meds will mean you will become so insensitive to pain that you will cause further injury : unlikely.

I shall say that to a couple of my colleagues who after years of "feeling great" had to come off the brain pills prescribed for knee injury and found themselves on the operating table (eventually at NHS pace) for knee AND hip replacement as they kept on walking and running on injured joints.

 "it only hurts in the morning" (incidentally when the pills effect has worn off).

 

NO thanks!

I rather pay and get the cause of the pain fixed rather than the pain itself.

Having experienced that myself,  my son didn't mess about and got his back sorted before it was too late.

He too was told that he had to be on "pain management" pills for the rest of his life.

What a lot of bollox!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

For SOME people, the pain meds allow things like physio, and avoid interventions.

 

For those who go on to surgery, some get cured and some get worse : surgery  has risks.

 

Yet again : you extrapolate your (limited!) experiences and apply them to everyone as “gospel”

 

it was that that made me consider if your brain wasn’t considering other possibilities: it was clear from your post you were too narrow-minded to fully appreciate your GP’s advice.

 

Specialists are specialists ; they see the cases that reach them.

GP’s are specialists in being GP’s : they prevent the specialists getting overwhelmed with people who don’t need them.

”The wizard and the gatekeeper”. From ? 1989?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s because there is no medicinal cure for what one GP coined ‘sh!t life syndrome’. It’s perfectly reasonable that someone struggling with lots of external factors beyond their control would have physical manifestations of their difficulties. Unfortunately the pills don’t cure financial problems, mend broken hearts or fix Rocky relationships but the pain these things, and more, can cause is very real indeed. 

  • Thanks 1

My views are my own and are not representative of any organisation. if you've found my post helpful please click on the star below.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

There are lots of reasons why these drugs are more commonly prescribed in more deprived areas, addiction is of course an issue but it is not the cause. The vast majority of working people in deprived areas are in jobs where they are more likely to have injuries or wear and tear that would require these medications - manual jobs are likely to lead to back pain for example. People in deprived areas are far more likely to suffer from depression for multiple reasons, some of which are obvious but also reasons like a lack of facilities, a lack of green space, job stress, an inability to take time off work; there are tonnes of reasons. The social determinants of health are really interesting, 'the Glasgow effect' is fascinating, although old research now I guess. People in more well off areas are likely to have more money and perhaps go for a massage to relieve stress, go to the gym or any number of other things they can do to improve their health simply because they have the money and facilities that people in deprived areas are less likely to have. Those in deprived areas sit taking medication whilst they wait on ridiculous waiting lists for the services that do exist in their area which are usually few and far between. Research also suggests that people from more well off areas are more likely to actively seek alternatives to medication such as talking therapies or physio than someone from a more deprived area (off hand I cant remember which piece of research this was but it was fairly recent). 

 

I referred myself to physio some time ago, waited a while then someone pointed out to me that I had access to physio through my job so I referred there I was seen the next week and started my course of physio which gradually reduced my need for painkillers. I forgot to cancel my referral for NHS physio and eventually an letter came to tell me I was high enough up on the list to make an appointment for three months time - that letter arrived at least six months or so after my original referral so that means it would have taken the best part of a year to be seen. That would have been almost a year of strong opioid painkillers. I was fortunate to have access through work, people in deprived areas are less likely to have access like this so they need to stay on the painkillers whilst they wait - what choice do they have? Should the GP not manage their pain while they are waiting for an alternative? 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...