Thank you for your response BankFodder.
First of all her employer is a care home and she is a Part Time Carer. I do not know what the company is called but would prefer not to publish it here even if I knew.
Having read through the link you provided I would tend to agree with your opinion regarding the Estoppel standard of proof especially as she is getting 50% more than she should of been expecting. Having said that she has had this from the very start and knowing her as I do it is possible she thought this was her monthly wages!
In her everyday life she goes from hand to mouth so there is no improvement in lifestyle unless you consider her absence from Foodbanks an improvement!
I think the solution is for her to repay at the low figure that seems to be in place but to disregard the contract requiring her to pay it back before or on leaving. Should she give notice and work four weeks how can we stop them from witholding her last months wages?
so just received an email from CRS. Saying I have to prove I cancelled...yawn. Bearing in mind this is way over a month ago I sent them a letter!
shall I just block them now? Not even respond?
this is regarding gymetc and I joined their gym online...
What does it actually mean when some one says" for clarity" you mean in your opinion really dont you?
HB Thanks, girl done well.
Acres of text to get through, are you sure I have not come across you before. Your addiction to point scoring is V familiar.
Anyway lets see if there is anything I have not cleared up already.
"'ll just answer this for clarity (not for an argument). This applies to SDs made in a Magistrates' Court in order to set aside aconviction where the defendant was not aware of the proceedings."
So much for clarity. Below is what the section says
(b)within 21 days of that date the declaration is served on the [F1designated officer for the court],
without prejudice to the validity of the information, the summons and all subsequent proceedings shall be void.
Notice "Shall be void. not set asidIf I am going to just be correcting basic reading i am not goiong tp conti
"When a person comes before a court to make such a Statutory Declaration the court must hear it if it is made within 21 days of the defendant learning of the conviction."
Noope The regulation says the court cannot interfere with the making of a SD,again completely different
Yes if it is, but unless the SD was made within 21 days of the action they are entitled to question it. As they do in the form you reproduced by asking how the defendant knew about the case. Said this alreay.
To answer your next paragraph, the court will not accept a lie, if there is one, they will have the option to increase the time however I doubt they would, or do you think they would just extend it? This is the test, of course.
Again you say SET ASSIDE, it isn't, the new case cannot be started if the old one is still pending of course.
Now having demonstrated your lack of knowledge. I shall move on. Your abstinence from posting is appreciated, either way, I will have you on ignore. Nothing personal I just dont think there is anything you can tell me.
One more thing the result does not compete with anything I have actually said, and everything I have said is correct, in relation to the legislation.
Don't touch them owe me £500 since January 2019 make excuse after excuse. Seem they always have software problems sending money out. Keep saying they will call back or email nothing been chasing it now for 6 mths the phone staff always have the same banter we will chase it up and get back to you then nothing!