Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thousands more passengers could face delays or cancellations after an arson attack on France's train network on Friday.View the full article
    • you never use or give an email  2nd class stamp with free proof of posting from any po counter dx
    • Much appreciated for the ammendment. The snottier the better right!   What I am assuming is that this response is to be posted to Gladstones? However, I am seeing some users sending this as an email instead, which is a little confusing.  If we're happy with this response, what would you suggest is the best way to send it over to them (post/email), and is there anything additional I could include (if necessary)?  Thanks again! 
    • Hi I've read through other threads to better inform me of the process from here onwards. When I put in the MoneyClaim it gave me a claim number and it currently says to wait for the defendant to respond, they have until 7 August.   It seems their most likely action is to extend that a further 14 days to about 21 August - this hasn't happened yet, of course, as it is only 27 July but I'm anticipating that may be the case. when the expected defence action is taken by EVRi I will need to submit DQ with these responses A1 - no mediation B - my contact details C1 - yes to the small claims track D1 - No.  If No please state why.  I believe the defence will provide some rebuttal to the particulars of claim and so I need to include details as to why the claim requires a hearing.  Is there some certain templated text I can include here or will it vary depending on what the defendant comes back with? I see on the form it mentions the following: Relevant reasons include that there are factual disputes which will need the judge to hear from witnesses directly or the issues are so complex they need to be argued orally.  Hoping to reach out to see what may be the most effective statements for D1 reasoning. E1-5 are pretty straightforward. I want to get ahead of things and be ready to take the next step so I appreciate what advice you may have about the DQ.   Thanks!  
    • Rachel Reeves is set to reveal a public finances shortfall of billions on pounds after a snap audit.View the full article
  • 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 
        • Thanks
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 162 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

Benefits an hospital stays


Surfer01
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 557 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

My wife was admitted to hospital in early August and discharged 17 days later.  We both get carer's allowance which changes the amount of pension credit I receive.  DWP was notified and my pension credit was reduced.  It took them 3 weeks to reinstate it.

 

Unfortunately 6 weeks later end of September my wife was admitted back into hospital as the first time she was misdiagnosed and probably discharged too soon.  DWP notified and within 3 weeks they reduced my pension again.  My wife was in hospital for 32 days and discharged on 2nd Nov.  We are still waiting for the benefit to be reinstated and every week when we have phoned in we have been told it is in a queue.

 

Yesterday the person that we spoke to said that because she had been in hospital in August this was link to her stay in hospital in Oct as it was within 3 months of her previous admission.  I have tried searching to verify this information, but no such luck so not sure if they are telling porkies or not?

 

We were under the impression that if the break was longer than 28 days then the clock would start ticking again on the second admission and would not be linked to the previous admission which was more than 28 days?

 

Can anyone please advise as the reduction of over £110 a week is having a big knock on effect on us.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would suggest you go back to query this and if they tell you the same thing, ask them to email you the DWP guidance to confirm what they are saying.

 

 

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Found some Carers Allowance guidance online, which may explain what you we're told. Seems to suggest that there can be loss of entitlement if there is more than one hospital stay within a period.

 

Breaks in care of the severely disabled person
[See DMG Memo 06/20]
60045 A week when a person does not satisfy the “caring condition” is treated as a week in which that  
condition is satisfed, if that person
1. has only temporarily ceased to satisfy the “caring condition” and
2. has satisfed the caring condition for at least 14 weeks in a 26 week period. The 26 week period ends  
with the frst week that person no longer satisfed the caring condition and
3. would have satisfed it for at least 22 weeks in the 26 week period described in DMG 60045 2., but for  
the fact that
3.1 either that person or
3.2 the severely disabled person
was undergoing medical or other treatment, as an in-patient in a hospital or similar institution1
.
1 SS (ICA) Regs, reg 4(2)
60046 The effect of DMG 60045 is that a temporary break or series of temporary breaks in care may be
ignored. Entitlement to CA will continue provided that the temporary breaks do not amount in total to  
more than
1. twelve weeks - where the claimant or the severely disabled person has spent at least eight of those  
weeks undergoing medical or other treatment as an in-patient in a hospital or similar institution or

 

2. four weeks - if the temporary break in care is for any other reason in any period of 26 weeks ending  
with the frst week of the temporary break in care.
60047 Where a break in care
1. is for any reason other than hospital in-patient treatment and
2. lasts for more than four weeks in the 26 week period
no further breaks in care can be ignored in that 26 week period, even if they are in hospital.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks not sure I understand it fully, but maybe you can offer so more insight.  Wife and myself are regarded as disabled and both get the carers allowance for one another.  She was in hospital in Aug from 5th until 22nd and then again from 30th Sept to 1st Nov.  She should never have been discharged in Aug which is why she was readmitted urgently on 30th when she almost died. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't fully understand what it says. The last bit seems to say that as the second stay in hospital was within 26 weeks of the first hospital stay, that Carers Allowance cannot ignore the break in care. In other words the Carers Allowance stops being payable from 30th September.

 

Did they tell you that you stopped being eligible for Carers Allowance from 30th September ?

 

Suggest asking for mandatory reconsideration of the decision, which will force them to explain the decision.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, unclebulgaria67 said:

Don't fully understand what it says. The last bit seems to say that as the second stay in hospital was within 26 weeks of the first hospital stay, that Carers Allowance cannot ignore the break in care. In other words the Carers Allowance stops being payable from 30th September.

 

Did they tell you that you stopped being eligible for Carers Allowance from 30th September ?

 

Suggest asking for mandatory reconsideration of the decision, which will force them to explain the decision.

 

I have already asked them about reconsideration and I got nowhere as it seems they do not understand the rules fully either as all they tell me is that it will be back paid. 

 

However even so it is now 7 weeks since my wife was discharged from hospital and still no sign of the benefit being reinstated although we are entitled to it and it has been confirmed that it will be reinstated eventually, but no idea when.

 

The rules are very confusing and not exactly clear and are opposite to what we were told previously.  If they had diagnosed my wife correctly the first time instead of discharging her too soon, there probably would be no issue

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Although we both get PIP they also removed the "Severe disability element" for some strange reason.  According to their rep that I spoke with yesterday this should not have been removed and they will be investigating.  It has now been nearly 3 months since they stopped it.  They were very quick to stop the benefits, but extremely slow to reinstate them!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...