Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Is all of this actually on the signage? Don't remember seeing that much detail on other threads.
    • If I have learnt one thing from this forum, it's not to call and communicate via email. I passed this info on to her and they are pushing for her to call them.    "Unfortunately, you will need to call us. The conversation won’t be so black and white as to therefore type over email. In a nutshell we can confirm that the request to not pay for 3 months we cannot put in place"  I emailed them back on her behalf and said that what ever is discussed over the phone will need to be put in an email so that she can review it properly. No decisions will be made on that phone call.    "Once we speak to you on the phone we will follow up with an email to confirm the options discussed. [Phone number]"   Why are they pushing for a phone call? If its not so black and white, why can they then follow up with an email?  
    • Appreciate input Andy, updated: IN THE ******** County Court Claim No. [***] BETWEEN: LC Asset 2 S.A.R.L CLAIMANT AND [***] DEFENDANT ************ _________________________ ________ WITNESS STATEMENT OF [***] _________________________ ________ I, [***], being the Defendant in this case will state as follows;     I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in this claim.   1. I understand that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much-reduced cost to the amount claimed and which the original creditors have already written off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income as confirmed in the claimant’s witness statement exhibit by way of the Deed of Assignment. As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights. This means that when an assignee purchases debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information). The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party. 2. The Claim relates to an alleged Credit Card agreement between the Defendant and Bank of Scotland plc. Save insofar of any admittance it is accepted that the Defendant has had contractual agreements with Bank of Scotland plc in the past, the Defendant is unaware as to what alleged debt the Claimant refers. The Defendant has not entered any contract with the Claimant. 3. The Defendant requested a copy of the CCA on the 24/12/2022 along with the standard fee of £1.00 postal order, to which the defendant received a reply from the Claimant dated 06/02/2023. To this date, the Claimant has failed to disclose a valid agreement and proof as per their claim that this is enforceable, that Default Notice and Notice of Assignment were sent to and received by the Defendant, on which their claim relies. The Claimant is put to strict proof to verify and confirm that the exhibit *** is a true copy of the agreement and are the true Terms and Conditions as issued at the time of inception of the online application and execution of the agreement. 4. Point 3 is noted. The Claimant pleads that a default notice has been served upon the defendant as evidenced by Exhibit [***]. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 5. Point 6 is noted and disputed. The Defendant cannot recall ever having received the notice of assignment as evidenced in the exhibit marked ***. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 6. Point 11 is noted and disputed. See 3. 7. Point 12 is noted, the Defendant doesn’t recall receiving contact where documentation is provided as per the Claimants obligations under CCA. In addition, the Claimant pleads letters were sent on dates given, yet those are not the letters evidenced in their exhibits *** 8. Point 13 is noted and denied. Claimant is put to strict proof to prove allegations. 9. The Claimant did not provide a true copy of the CCA in response to the Defendants request of 21/12/2022. The Claimant further claims that the documents are sufficient to pursue a Judgement and are therefore copies of original documents in their possession. Conclusion 10. Without the Claimant providing a valid true copy of the executed Credit agreement that complies with the CCA, the Claimant has no grounds on which to enforce this alleged debt. 11. The Claimant has been unjustly enriched at the expense of the Defendant by purchasing bulk debt at a greatly reduced cost and subrogating for the original creditor in trying to recuperate the full amount of the original debt 12. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. On receipt of this claim I could not recall the precise details of the agreement or any debt and sought clarity from the claimant by way of a Section 78 request. The Claimant failed to comply. I can only assume as this was due to the Claimant not having any enforceable documentation and issuing a claim in hope of an undefended default judgment.   Statement of Truth I, ********, the Defendant, believe the facts stated within this Witness Statement to be true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in it’s truth. Signed: _________________________ _______ Dated: _____________________
    • Morning,  I am hoping someone can help, I am posting on behalf of my friend so I will try and provide as much info as possible.  Due health reasons, she is currently not working and unable to pay her contractual car finance payments. She emailed 247 Money and asked for a 3 month payment holiday, they refused this straight away with no reasons as to why. They have told her that instead she can make a payment of £200. She is currently getting £400+ a month ssp so this is not acceptable. She went back to them and explained she cannot make this payment and they have not offered an alternative plan. Its £200 or she falls into default.  She is now panicking as she does not want her car to be taken away. What options does she have?  Thank you, 
    • Read these 6 things you can do to be empathetic to other people’s views and perspectives.View the full article
  • 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

Help photos without consent


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6188 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

You obviously piqued some interest with this thread Wobbles. No less than five Mods responded - two of them Supermods! Not that's the sort of thing we should have more of...:)

Robertxc v. Abbey - £3300 Settled in full

Robertxc v. Clydesdale - £750 Settled in full

Nationwide v. Robertxc - £2000 overdraft wiped out, Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Style Card - Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Abbey (1) - Data Protection Act action. £750 compensation

Robertxc v. Abbey (2) - Data Protection Act action. £2000 compensation, default removed

 

The opinions on this post are those of Robertxc and not necessarily the opinions of the group and do not constitute sound legal advice. You are advised to seek professional legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 87
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

there was a notice issued by the information commissioners office at christmas saying something along the lines that no one can stop you taking a picture of your child participating in something. What i would like to know is, why do you feel that "any" child is compromised by having their child photographed at a football match? I think you are being paranoid and this is a sad reflection of the pc world gone crazy - there are no more child molesters/peadophiles or child murderers today, than there was 40 years ago. Now if anyone gets turned on by a bunch of grubby lads playing football then they only have to look in their local paper every week to see pictures of school teams playing.

Lula

 

Lula v Abbey - Settled

Lula v Abbey (2) - Settled

Lula v Abbey (3) - Stayed

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unlike France we don't own our image if taken in a public place. Schools can ban photo's as part of the implied contract you enter into when you visit an organised event. Photographers usualy ask you to sign a consent form so you can't later make allegations or sue them & the image (your image) by way of copywrite belongs to them

 

Should you start taking photos at a school event you can be asked to stop on the grounds there is no consent & that you by breaching an agreement are guilty of tresspass

Link to post
Share on other sites

its not breaking any actual laws as i know off.

as for being photographed, well, what about the thousands of times a year we are ALL caught on camera, in the street, in shops, banks, tube stations, petrol stations etc.

lets face it, our children are always being filmed or watched.

i myself wouldnt be happy about any of my childrens photos being on the web, although i believe some schools have their own websites but whether they ask for permission or not i dont know.

in this day and age, with mobile phone technology and big brother, its a way of life.

Please note that although my advice is offered, you should consult your legal representative before taking ANY action.

 

 

have a nice day !!

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can put a childs photo on a website but there must be NO details by which they can be identified otherwise your in breach of the Data Protection Act Also if there is the slightest risk they can be identified you could be arrested for child endangerment

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets try and keep things on track here - there is no suggestion of such things.

 

Unless I am mistaken, this was a match in a public place, no intention of wrong-doing by the photographer is either accused or implied, so that person was perfectly entitled to take photos. There would not need to be agreement by others or authorisation by the organisers etc.

 

The photos appearing on a web site do not seem to be identifying individuals, although I do also believe it likely that the website owners might be persuaded to remove certain ones if a potential problem with a child's security is highlighted to them - a responsible one would.

 

I do not know if this is the case here, by the way, although that is what seems to have been suggested by the OP.

..

.

 

Opinions given herein are made informally by myself as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Robertxc v. Abbey - £3300 Settled in full

Robertxc v. Clydesdale - £750 Settled in full

Nationwide v. Robertxc - £2000 overdraft wiped out, Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Style Card - Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Abbey (1) - Data Protection Act action. £750 compensation

Robertxc v. Abbey (2) - Data Protection Act action. £2000 compensation, default removed

 

The opinions on this post are those of Robertxc and not necessarily the opinions of the group and do not constitute sound legal advice. You are advised to seek professional legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As a now ex-junior football manager (thank god) the taking of photos by anyone of junior players is a big no no and really anyone who is involved in junior football should know this. Everyone in the game has to take child protection courses and CRB checks, so the person who took the snaps should be in no doubt.

 

However this may be a genuine mistake by the snapper, she may not have realised a youngster was playing. Maybe a short phonecall to the person involved will be enough to remove the errant photos. If this doesn't work then a complaint to the Child Protection Officer at your County FA should do the trick, and this would mean that he/she would get a very sharp rap on the knuckles.

 

AS an aside, and I know I'm going to be inflammatory on this standpoint. I've been involved in football for over 30 years, but the paperwork that I have had to deal with regarding the lads game from the age of 11 onwards has escalated beyond belief, behaviour is monitored the standard of the behaviour of parents, team and officials is scurtinised, but quite honestly it doesn't stop the really nasty events still happening.

 

I must admit I'm glad that (from a personal point of view) that my time has come to and end. We've had success, but the last four seasons under 13 to under 16 have seen us permanatly at the bottom of the lower division of the age group. The lads get alot of stick at school and on the street, but they turn up every week, only once in six years have we had to field 10 players! I've seen these lads grow into fine young men. No I'm not the sort of manager who wants the team to win at all costs, every lad gets a fair crack of the whip, but what I do stand up against is poor sportsmanship, cheating, violence, bullying, swearing, smoking and drinking. The best player in the team for many a season was asked to leave at Xmas coz he was hung over.

 

Oh dear I've seen to gone of the plot a little now, I'll get off my soapbox

 

Mike

If I've helped tip my scales

 

Blair Oliver & Scott, £2500 written off December 2006 Default removed January 2007:D

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt/56001-mike220359-blair-oliver-scott.html

 

Monument, didn't sign the agreement

:D

 

Lloyds TSB didn't sign the agreement!

:D

 

Citicards, didn't sign the agreement

:D

 

RBS tut, tut!

:rolleyes:

 

Morgan Stanley, oh dear

:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

As a now ex-junior football manager (thank god) the taking of photos by anyone of junior players is a big no no and really anyone who is involved in junior football should know this. Everyone in the game has to take child protection courses and CRB checks, so the person who took the snaps should be in no doubt.

 

 

There is a massive difference between being a spectator of junior football and managing/coaching it - the "big no no" IMO does not apply to the spectators in any way shape or form. Just my opinion of course!

7 years in retail customer service

 

Expertise in letting and rental law for 6 years

 

By trade - I'm an IT engineer working in the housing sector.

 

Please note that any posts made by myself are for information only and should not and must not be taken as correct or factual. If in doubt, consult with a solicitor or other person of equal legal standing.

 

Please click the star if I have helped!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wobbles, I actually am a foster carer, and I've certainly never had any guidance to keep looked after children from participating in things like this. It's obviously a matter of comkmon sense. For example, there's an enormous difference between someone taking pictures of a child in a swimming pool (who isn't their own), and that child forming part of the background crowd in a photograph of a public event. Would you object to your child appearing in a crowd close-up on Sky Sports?

 

I'm playing devils advocate here so don't shoot the messenger! Each junior team manager has to give a FA certified code of conduct and also one endorsed by the club the player signs on to. Each parent has to sign and send it back. With that wad of paper is a FA endorsed permission slip which allows the palyer to be photographed. No signed slip, no photograph.

 

Charter Standard clubs (please don't get me started on this aspect of Junior Football) have to have a paper train of child protection permissions to comply with the FA rules. If a player plays for a CS team then you must be issued with the necessary permissions and they must be filed away safely by the club, because the FA audit it. The rules are so strict, that if a team photograph is published in the paper, the paper is not allowed to name the children. Iknow, I know we all have seen these photos, but strictly speaking they are against the FA child protection guidlines and the team, club and or manager can be sanctioned by the FA.

 

My local paper for instance will not allow photos to be published without proper names thats why my team have never been published. However other teams have for the same paper, but you will be surprised how many Rooneys, Owens and Lampards play in Shropshire.

 

I know, I know you all say that CP is common sense, well it is, but if you flout the FA rules on CP then you will bear the price.

 

Incidentally, not only do the players have to comply with the FAs rules on conduct, parents do as well, and they can be sanctioned by the FA as well, read the small print of all codes of conduct, if you are issued. Nevertheless, it doescn't stop the parents of players using racists remarks abusing players and physically and verbally abusing refs.

 

I'm glad its all over I'm going back to my adult Sunday League side its alot easier beleivee me.

 

Mike

If I've helped tip my scales

 

Blair Oliver & Scott, £2500 written off December 2006 Default removed January 2007:D

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt/56001-mike220359-blair-oliver-scott.html

 

Monument, didn't sign the agreement

:D

 

Lloyds TSB didn't sign the agreement!

:D

 

Citicards, didn't sign the agreement

:D

 

RBS tut, tut!

:rolleyes:

 

Morgan Stanley, oh dear

:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a massive difference between being a spectator of junior football and managing/coaching it - the "big no no" IMO does not apply to the spectators in any way shape or form. Just my opinion of course!

 

In a perfect world that would be nice, but in kids football beleive me that it isn't and you can get yourself and your team in alot of trouble if it gets reported.

 

Mike

If I've helped tip my scales

 

Blair Oliver & Scott, £2500 written off December 2006 Default removed January 2007:D

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt/56001-mike220359-blair-oliver-scott.html

 

Monument, didn't sign the agreement

:D

 

Lloyds TSB didn't sign the agreement!

:D

 

Citicards, didn't sign the agreement

:D

 

RBS tut, tut!

:rolleyes:

 

Morgan Stanley, oh dear

:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I seem to open a can of worms with this one dont I.

 

The point i am trying to make it that, no I cant stop people taking photos in public, but the youger lad as I said is under a care order, his biological parents are not allowed access to him for whatever reason, but the photos of him in the background cleary identify the area he is living in. His foster carer ahs moved address at least 3 times in the last 2 years, to aviod the child being snatched by his biological parents.

 

I am annoyed about my son seeming to be the main target for the pics, he is in at least 35 out of the 43 pics that have been published on the interent, if the photographer wanted them for her own personal use, ie family photo album I would not have a problem with it.

 

I have emailed the County FA that the junior club is affiliated to, and it has been passed on to the child protection department who will reply to me in due course.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You cannot stop anyone taking a photo of anything, unless it breaches the laws already mentioned, which certainly a kid at a football match won't. Sorry.

 

Also, any photo's taken by photographers, AFAIK, owned by them as Intellectual Property, but I'm sure someone on here knows more about it (BF???)

 

M

Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely - Lord Acton.

 

Advice offered by MattyH is without predjudice and is for your judgement as to whether to take it. You should seek the assistance or hire of a solicitor or other paid professional if in doubt. Please research any information I have offered, as I will not be held liable for any incorrect advice i've given you.

 

<--------- If my advice has helped, please tip my scales. 8)

 

For Further advice come into the Chat Room: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/chat/flashchat.php

FAQ's : http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/faqs-please-read-these/

Step By Step Instructions ; http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/faqs-please-read-these/31460-example-step-step-instructions.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to add our junior club photographer asks all managers and parents present at any match to sign a consent from, if any parent is not present any images of that childs face are edited so they can not be seen, our club photographer is also very good as the photos are high quaility as in the newspapers on a sunday morning were the camera is focused on the players and the background looks a blur.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to add our junior club photographer asks all managers and parents present at any match to sign a consent from, if any parent is not present any images of that childs face are edited so they can not be seen, our club photographer is also very good as the photos are high quaility as in the newspapers on a sunday morning were the camera is focused on the players and the background looks a blur.

 

Thats because he's affiliated to the club.. He doesn't have to.

 

Matt

Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely - Lord Acton.

 

Advice offered by MattyH is without predjudice and is for your judgement as to whether to take it. You should seek the assistance or hire of a solicitor or other paid professional if in doubt. Please research any information I have offered, as I will not be held liable for any incorrect advice i've given you.

 

<--------- If my advice has helped, please tip my scales. 8)

 

For Further advice come into the Chat Room: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/chat/flashchat.php

FAQ's : http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/faqs-please-read-these/

Step By Step Instructions ; http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/faqs-please-read-these/31460-example-step-step-instructions.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats because he's affiliated to the club.. He doesn't have to.

 

Matt

 

Youre right but it would only take one of the parents to ring the police to find him in the cop shop for a few hours explaining what hes doing. Remember the police were involved in drwaing up the FA guidelines.

 

The safest thing for everyone is do not take photos at kids football matches.

 

As regards the LEA that one earlier person has mentioned, they have no jurisdiction over FA endorsed matches, but if my memory serves me correctly the rigidity of their guidleines depends on wher you live.

 

The other poster who mentioned the boy in care, we've had a couple of lads signed on in a similar situation. Ring your local Count FA, the number is in the phone book and ask for the number of the FAs child protection unit at Lilleshall Shropshire. They will handle the situation for you and it will all be in confidence. If the snapper is a member of a Football organisation and refuses to comply with their instructions he/she could find her involvement in kids football brought to a speedy end.

 

I know its maddening to those who are probably reading this and thinking that I'm typing a load of rubbish, but these are the rules that I've had to abide by over the last few years, and one of the reasons I'm going. I got into kids football to give kids the opportuinity of playing the game, nothing else. THe trouble is the heavy rules that are handed down are such that alot of potential managers cant be bothered, so the number of teams shrink, so the number of players shrink.

 

In time football in thsi scountry could be where Cricket or Rugby is, played by a select few, who have always had the ability, not by those who, with a little encouragement, and time can blossom. Without the means to do that the game will lose potential good players.

 

Mike

If I've helped tip my scales

 

Blair Oliver & Scott, £2500 written off December 2006 Default removed January 2007:D

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt/56001-mike220359-blair-oliver-scott.html

 

Monument, didn't sign the agreement

:D

 

Lloyds TSB didn't sign the agreement!

:D

 

Citicards, didn't sign the agreement

:D

 

RBS tut, tut!

:rolleyes:

 

Morgan Stanley, oh dear

:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Youre right but it would only take one of the parents to ring the police to find him in the cop shop for a few hours explaining what hes doing. Remember the police were involved in drwaing up the FA guidelines.

 

Incorrect. There is no law preventing taking photos in public places. Any such complaint would have to be false and malicious, would could result in the complainant being the one receiving prison.

Post by me are intended as a discussion of the issues involved, as these are of general interest to me and others on the forum. Although it is hoped such discussion will be of use to readers, before exposing yourself to risk of loss you should not rely on any principles discussed without confirming the situation with a qualified person.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Incorrect. There is no law preventing taking photos in public places. Any such complaint would have to be false and malicious, would could result in the complainant being the one receiving prison.

 

Definately!

 

I'd certainly sue over such a false allegation.

Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely - Lord Acton.

 

Advice offered by MattyH is without predjudice and is for your judgement as to whether to take it. You should seek the assistance or hire of a solicitor or other paid professional if in doubt. Please research any information I have offered, as I will not be held liable for any incorrect advice i've given you.

 

<--------- If my advice has helped, please tip my scales. 8)

 

For Further advice come into the Chat Room: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/chat/flashchat.php

FAQ's : http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/faqs-please-read-these/

Step By Step Instructions ; http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/faqs-please-read-these/31460-example-step-step-instructions.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm afraid you are both missing the point, however, farewell from the thread.

 

Mike

If I've helped tip my scales

 

Blair Oliver & Scott, £2500 written off December 2006 Default removed January 2007:D

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt/56001-mike220359-blair-oliver-scott.html

 

Monument, didn't sign the agreement

:D

 

Lloyds TSB didn't sign the agreement!

:D

 

Citicards, didn't sign the agreement

:D

 

RBS tut, tut!

:rolleyes:

 

Morgan Stanley, oh dear

:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm afraid you are both missing the point, however, farewell from the thread.

 

Mike

 

Sorry.. but if you're wrong, then the correct facts must be posted.

 

Please explain what point we were missing.

 

Matt

Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely - Lord Acton.

 

Advice offered by MattyH is without predjudice and is for your judgement as to whether to take it. You should seek the assistance or hire of a solicitor or other paid professional if in doubt. Please research any information I have offered, as I will not be held liable for any incorrect advice i've given you.

 

<--------- If my advice has helped, please tip my scales. 8)

 

For Further advice come into the Chat Room: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/chat/flashchat.php

FAQ's : http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/faqs-please-read-these/

Step By Step Instructions ; http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/faqs-please-read-these/31460-example-step-step-instructions.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you or the foster carer actually asked the woman to remove the photo of the child in care from the website? If the situation is expalined then the problem is likely to be solved quickly and simply.

Consumer Health Forums - where you can discuss any health or relationship matters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with gizmo.

I'm more concerned at the fact you know these children are on the child protection register, that's a serious breach of confidentiality!

As far as the junior league is concerned you have the right to complain and they will take it seriously. I wouldn't want some person posting a picture of my child on the internet either. You can also ask this person to remove it and explain your concerns?

You can also contact Children and Family Services (Social Services, just phone your local council who will give you the number) and ask the advise of the Child Protection Coordinator who I'm sure will have all the info you need.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gracie the reason I know about the child being on the child protection register is because I am secretary of the junior club he is with and his foster mother told me and his coach/manager so that we would be aware of the situation and could be more careful with watching him at matches and training sessions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...