Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • is the home in joint names but this is solely your debt? need far more history to be able to comment if it's paid off and was not just written of by one partly on their books and sold to anther, thus the cra file says £0. dx
    • So, Sunak has managed to get someone to 'volunteer to go to Rwanda hasn't he? .. for just £3000 payment to the person plus 5 years free board and lodging isnt it? - cost to UK taxpayer over £300M+ (300 million quid+) isnt it? - Bargain says Rwanda, especially with all the profit we made privately selling those luxury chalets Bravermann advertised for us   I wonder how many brits would jump at that offer? Thousands? Hundreds of thousands? Lets see, up to 5 years free board and lodging and £3k in my pocket .. I'd go - and like that person - just come back if/when I get bored. First job - off to Botswana for a week to see the elephants.   Of course the paid volunteers going to Botswana are meaningless - Rwanda have REPEATEDLY said they wont take any forcibly trafficked people in breach of international law eh? Have the poops actually got any civil servants to agree to go yet - probably end up as more massive payments to VIPal contractors to go and sit there doing nowt shortly eh?    
    • Hi Wondered if I could get a little advise please. I entered into a commercial lease (3 years) and within a few months I had to leave as the business I was trading with collapsed. I returned the keys to the landlord and explained the situation and no money, also likely to go on benefits but the landlord stuck to their guns. They have now instructed solicitors to send letter before action claiming just over £4000. The lease was mine and so the debt. I know this. I have emailed the solicitors twice to explain I am out of work and that with help from family I could offer a full and final settlement figure of £1500 or £10pw. This was countered by them with an offer to reduce the debt by £400, or pay off the amount over 12 months. I went back with an improved full and final offer of £2500 or £20pw. This has been rejected with the comment 'papers ready to go to court'. I have no hope of paying the £4000 and so it will have to go to court. Pity as I have no debts otherwise but not working is a killer. I wondered if they take me to court, could I ask for mediation? I also think that taking me to court will result in a pretty much nothing per week payment from my benefits. Are companies just pushing ahead with action even if a better offer is on the table? Thanks for your help.
    • Hi all, Many thanks for the advice! Unfortunately, the reply to the email was as expected…   Starbucks UK Customer Care <[email protected]> Hi xxxxxx, We are sorry to read you received a parking charge after using our Stansted Airport - A120 DT store. Unfortunately, the car park here is managed by MET parking. Both Starbucks and EuroGarages who own and operate this site are not able to help and have no authority to overturn any parking charges received. If you have followed the below terms then you would need to send all correspondence to [email protected], who will be able to assist you further. Several signs around the car park clarify the below terms and conditions: • Maximum stay 60 minutes, whilst the store is open. If the store is closed, pay to park applies. • The car park is for Starbucks customers only who make a purchase in our store, a charge will be issued if you left the site. • If you had made a purchase and required additional time, you must have inputted your registration number into the in store iPad which would have extended your stay up to 3 hours • To park in a disabled bay, you must have displayed a valid disabled badge. • If Starbucks was closed, you must have paid for parking as charges still apply, following signage located on site. • If you didn’t use the store, you must have paid for parking, following signage located on site Please ensure all further correspondence is directed to MET parking at the above email address, and accept our apologies that we cannot help you further on this matter.  Kind Regards,  Lora K  Customer Care Team Leader Starbucks Coffee Company, Building 4 Chiswick Park, London, W4 5YE
    • Thanks HB edited and re-uploaded. Thanks for the heads up 👍
  • 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

Dvla Medical Urine Tests


Dvla
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1444 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

There are two separate but intersecting issues here.

a) why your urine appears dilute to DVLA

b) how to prove to DVLA you aren’t taking codeine.

 

a) You mention you are on blood pressure tablets. If these are ”water tablets” / ’diuretics’ : that might explain the dilute urine. Would you be happy to say which one(s) you are on?

If this is the issue, that then feeds into b).

 

b) if you are on diuretics, you could ask DVLA Driver’s Medical Group for which they would prefer of you:

i) providing a hair sample for drug testing, or

ii) Asking your GP to change you to a ‘non-diuretic’ blood pressure medicine if the GP can offer an option that you could accept for the benefit of allowing you to ‘pass’ the testing.

 

BF, my reading of the issue is NOT that the OP is testing positive for codeine, but that DVLA are saying the urine sample looks like it is too dilute, and looks to them like the OP has drunk lots of water or taken diuretics to dilute the sample, making it unsuitable to reliably test.

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, BankFodder said:

 

Presumably you are at your post-weaning stage?

 


OP said their last codeine ingestion was 2018, so, yes, presumably ... unless they have ingested eg (as you mentioned) Poppy seeds.

 

It reads to me as “sample being rejected by DVLA” rather than “sample tests false positive”, though.

 

If the OP could confirm (+/- the details of their blood pressure med(s)),.....

Edited by BazzaS
Link to post
Share on other sites

OP,

again (separating out the issues),

If your current meds aren’t a reason your urine is more dilute than it should be, you might want to mention DVLA’s test finding to your GP, (or at least ask them if they are already aware of you having dilute urine).

 

so unless,

a) you are on diuretics, and

b) DVLA agree hair testing,

It seems likely you’ll be speaking to your GP’s. Even if DVLA agree hair testing you might want to discuss it with your GP anyway, for peace of mind.

Edited by BazzaS
Link to post
Share on other sites

Amlodipine (on its own) shouldn't give ‘dilute urine’.

 

Amlodipine is also available as a tablet that contains 2 other meds, one of which is a diuretic (this would be under brand name ‘Sevikar’ though).

 

if it isn’t clear why DVLA think your urine is to dilute : muscle mass will affect the level of creatinine in your blood, and thus in your urine, so this MIGHT be the issue.

Suggest you seek advice from your GP. Your GP can consider why (& will be looking at it from a “your health, including driving” point of view, with a less narrow focus than DVLA’s “licensing only” point of view). Your GP might send a urine sample and might even send a paired urine and blood sample to look into this further.

 

Your Article 4 Human Right (if looking at the UK’s Human Rights Act) is an “absolute” right, and is the right not to be held in slavery or servitude, or made to do forced labour. I think it would be “a stretch” to claim your Article 4 rights were being infringed.

 

if you were thinking instead of your Article 6 right to a fair trial, you would have to exhaust your right to appeal first, which would be by complaint to the Chief Exec of DVLA, and then an appeal to a Magistrate’s Court. It’d be sensible to have the info from your GP to argue your point on medical grounds for the first , and sensible to use a solicitor used to the law regarding driving and DVLA appeals for the latter.

 

There is no Article 20 Human Right Under the UK’s Human Rights Act.

if you are instead trying to invoke Article 20 (personal mobility) of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities: that’d be another complex battle!. I could ask a friend with experience in this field but I would expect the answer to be similar to above : would need to exhaust existing mechanisms for escalation / appeal, first.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Has your GP sent a paired blood and urine, (urine for ‘urine osmolarity’), test?

Checked your blood sugar?


https://labtestsonline.org.uk/tests/osmolality-osmolarity

 

That might give you a starting point.

 

Have DVLA given any indication of what tests they are using (urinary specific gravity? Urine  Osmolality?? Urinary Sodium and/or Creatinine???) to decide your urine is “too dilute”?

 

The approach I would take is:

a) Find out why DVLA think your urine is too dilute (starting this soon, as it may take a while to get a reply if they don’t want to say!), at the same time as

b) asking your GP for the blood and urine test, to ensure your results are normal for you / your muscle mass

c) If your blood and urine results are normal for you / your muscle mass, prepare to start the (appeal to DVLA / escalate to DVLA Chief Exec / Magistrates Court appeal) process.

 

The grounds for appeal would be that they are failing to make a reasonable adjustment for your disability (using alternative testing for those people with disabilities that lead them to have such reduced muscle mass) that lead you to be unable to meet their current testing regime.

 

I’d expect this to be a long, drawn out process (unless someone else has been through it, and you could refer them to that case, at which point they’ll likely back down when faced with precedent).

 

For that reason, once you have your medical evidence, I’d suggest enlisting the help of a disability rights / disability personal mobility rights organisation : to help you find a precedent, or increase your chance of winning and creating that precedent!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...