Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Standard form being sent to large numbers of claimants. Just answer as the form asks.  No need to  go into any detail, unless the forms asks for specific details of how health impacts on daily activities. If you are worried contact Citizens Advice as they are experts with PIP, as they are trained to understand what evidence is required for assessments.
    • Resume payments with the debt collectors? You say not to pay dca though do you not? 
    • yes they mostly would be enforceable, but that wasnt the point. even if they get a CCJ the very worst they could have done is get a restriction k which is useless to them. doesnt hurt anything. the CCJ would remain on file for 6yrs yes, but then gone same as a DN. the rest k charge does not show at all. and even so, the idea was to get your debts issued a default notice ASAP, them RESUME payments.. the advise is NOT conflicting, just you don't read things properly or understand.  oh well. dx
    • This is the dilemma I had then and still have it. The bit that stopped me was the post 2015 comments about them being enforceable now in most instances which I feel hasn’t been answered unless I am missing something. the bonus I guess is not all credit agreements now will be chasing me so less people chasing me down so to speak. this is the problem as there is conflicting messaging out there it is hard to plan a strategic way forward 
    • In 2017 my wife was given PIP and I finally, officially, became her carer. In 2019 she was reviewed and we were told it would be done by phone to make it easier for her as she has mobility issues and anxiety. The review was very simple, Has anything changed? No, ok, we'll stay as you are then. In 2022 a second review, this time by phone again but with an awkward given at the end for 5 years. Today, we got a new review letter (I know wait lists are bad, but I dont think the wait will take til 2027 for a decision). We're a bit confused because it's a letter, not a phone call as before. The form is just questions that ask "has anything changed" Now, since 2017, nothing has changed except we had our home adapted via disability grant. This was noted in the phone calls. So we should really write that nothing has changed in the last 2 years. The adaptations have been mentioned in both previous phone reviews, but not in writing so I guess we should bring it up. But we feel that they want us to explain everything as if it were a new claim again... And are worried if we miss something in the original claim or the phone calls she will risk losing part of the award (a 2 point swing could be really bad) It does just say "has anything changed?" But in dealing with ESA prior to getting PIP, answering the question asked "has your condition worsened or improved" at a review process with a simple "no, I'm still the same" somehow led to ESA ending and needing appeal. So just want a bit of guidance. How much detail is needed? Is minimal ok? Or should we be blunt with the fact nothing has changed, and bullet point the things she struggles with in each section?   I know the obvious thing is to just explain it all,but over 10 years the sheer amount of times the poor woman has had ESA or PIP stopped/refused just because something was missed out in their report, or they felt it meant a new claim should be made, or that they judged her healthy because we missed a tiny thing in our forms. During COVID it finally seemed like it was all just going to be smooth, especially with the phone reviews and the 5 year reward, but here we are. We just want to make sure we have the least chance to trip ourselves up, but making sure we have what is expected if you get me? I wish I still had a copy of the forms from 2017, because I could just verbatim copy them and add in about the adaptation, but (ironically) we lost our photocopies we kept of them when the house was being adapted
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

United Utilities - How Dare they


j4the96
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6383 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 all

 

Not really posted on here that much, but find this an excellent forum and would first like to say thank you to all the people that contribute on here to make it what it is. (ok, arse licking over)

 

Here's the prob :

 

Was away from home for a week and returned yesterday. As i turned into the road, noticed that alot of excavation work was being carried out. As i drove up to my house, i noticed that a massive hole had been dug outside my house aswell as several other holes outside other houses.

 

I then noticed, that my car which i hadn't used for a week, had been moved to a few houses down. One of my neighbours came out and told me that workmen from United Utillites (waterboard) had moved/dragged my car from outside my house with a tractor, so they could dig the hole.

 

I immediately phoned UU and spoke to a manager (cant remember her name) she admitted that it was against the law for anyonne to touch your car except for the police. I said the car is damaged (isn't really ;)) and i want it sorting. She said of course, (sounded a bit guilty) i will send you a claim form and further investigate this matter.

 

Would I be in my rights to demmand a full MOT, Full Service and all repairs paid for ?

 

The car is quite old, probably why they thought they would just move it (VW Polo G reg)

 

Any help would be gretaly appreciated.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

Reading your post I do have grave misgivings about claiming for "....a full MOT, Full Service and all repairs paid for". To me this smacks of a fraudulent claim (with the possible criminal repercussions too) as you previously suggest the car is not actually damaged.

 

To my mind the only recompense you're entitled to is for any damage actually caused by the utility company when they entered your premises (if they did, see below) and removed your car.

 

Assuming your car was parked on your property and not on the road outside, maybe a better course of action would be to inform the police that your premises had been entered (don't forget to get a Crime Number from them) and then, whether they take action or not, to sue the utility company for trespass.

Jimbo 44 - always happy to help, but always willing to learn from being corrected too!!! Whilst any advice given may be based upon personal experience, please always be sure you seek guidance from a professional in the particular field.

 

Never be afraid to try something new. Remember that a lone amateur built the Ark, but a large group of professionals built the Titanic.

 

A 'click' on the scales is always appreciated if I have helped. Many Thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

dragging a car may have done untold damage.

 

i was thinking mot,service and repairs was abit excessive but it would be the only way to be sure, try getting them to pay for a mot test, if it fails, they should repair.

also the car would have been towed/dragged under authorization of someone senior or foreman.

-----------------------------------------------

Mortgage Express charges- settled in full after issuing claim

 

------------------------------------------------

To view the FAQ'S click here: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/faqs-please-read-these/

To view the PRELIM letter click here: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/516-1-data-protection-act.html

To view the Letter Before Action click here: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/92-3-letter-before-action.html

To find Registered Address:

http://www.esd.informationcommissioner.gov.uk/esd/search.asp

 

 

If my advise helps click here http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/reputation.php?p=366404

Link to post
Share on other sites

This would border on a crime - the offence of TWOC (taking without consent) is not relevant as the car was not 'taken' in the sense that damage was caused in order to gain control of the vehicle. However, as said above, if damage was caused then it could be construed as criminal damage.

 

When in the police force, we had many cases of obstruction where someone parked a car over a driveway. The car could be pushed or towed, as the obstructed owner was legally entitled to do this, or to have it towed away altogether, however if any damage was caused then bang- you have a crime. There could be damage you can't see, as mentioned above but it would probably hang on whether they had a legal reason for moving your vehicle - i.e. to gain access for emergency repairs or some other dire situation - not simply because it's where they had to work!

 

I agree with Jimbo, in that depending on where the car was dictates your case. If on private property, then they wouldn't have committed theft but you could bring a civil case of trespass against them - although, again it depends on the evidence and the circumstances.

 

Tricky area of law, but I do believe you would have a civil case and would be awared some form of damages!

Lived through bankruptcy to tell the tale! Worked in various industries and studied law at university. All advice is given in good faith only :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

chesham, of course the car was taken without consent

 

i would sue, but i dont know what sort of damages a person could claim

post office WON 12/11/06

 

abbey.LBA sent 30/10/06.MCOL claim submitted 8/11/06.allocation questionnaire sent 16/12/06.schedule of charges sent 16/12/06.WON

 

2nd abbey claim SAR sent 3/1/07.WON.complaint letter sent 18/1/08

 

alliance and Leicester.WON

Link to post
Share on other sites

I said the car is damaged (isn't really ;))

 

I'm not sure what your rights are but I certainly don't suggest lying about it. Although I do suggest getting the car checked over in case there is damage you're not aware of.

 

The only case I know of where this happened was when I worked for a gas pipeline company and we had to move a car to do an emergency job but car was moved under supervision of the police and small damages were paid for.

 

This didn't sound like an emergency so just get the car checked over and take it from there. Maybe someone else can advise on the legalities and what if anything you may be entitled to.

Ex CAG helper ^_^

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, the car wasn't taken without consent - the action of 'taking' would be if someone caused damage and / or entered the car - merely pushing/towing does not class it as being taken without consent so that wouldn't stand up.

 

Your claim for damages would be a) damages awarded to you under the tort of trespass (unliquidated damages, decided by the court) and b) any damage to the vehicle (liquidated damages, for which you would need to provide evidence as to the cost).

Lived through bankruptcy to tell the tale! Worked in various industries and studied law at university. All advice is given in good faith only :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, the car wasn't taken without consent - the action of 'taking' would be if someone caused damage and entered the car - merely pushing/towing does not class it as being taken without consent so that wouldn't stand up.

 

There is absolutely no need to cause damage to enter the car.

 

If I leave my keys in the car and somebody drives it off, it is still TWOC.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your not a mechanic (correct me if I am wrong) so you are not qualified to say there is no damage, dragging a car like that can cause damage to the axles, cv joints and loads of other mechanical workings. I think to claim for an MOT is fair to check the car is still road worthy. Service does not cover any damage so I would leave that out. But if the fail on the MOT is a cause of the actions then it is more than fair to claim for that.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

edit my above post to say "caused damage and / or entered the car"

 

My apologies for the mistake - there is no need to cause damage to a car to take it without the owners consent.

Lived through bankruptcy to tell the tale! Worked in various industries and studied law at university. All advice is given in good faith only :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...