Jump to content
We are now - The National Consumer Service ×


  • Tweets

    No tweets were found.

  • Posts

  • 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
      • 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
        • Thanks
        • Like

Recommended Posts

Hi all - I am am new to this forum so hope I am in the right place for this question -. I have recently applied for a job seekers allowance on the 10th of November. After waiting over a month for a reply I recieved a phone call from the decision maker stating that I was not intitled due to my partners income. She is a student recieving approximately £100 pounds a week. From this she must pay rent,food,petrol e.t.c. I am currenltly living with her. As she is my partner our incomes are combined when being accessed. I was aware of this but thought as she is a student there would be no way her income would affect my eligibility!

 

I am now in a very bad financial situation and as my claim has been rejected I am at a loss of what to do next. I am really angry, confused and perplexed by how a student is supposed to support there partner! £100 is not much even for one person.

 

I have a couple of questions:

 

Is this possible or has there been a big mistake that I should chase up and appeal?

 

Should I go into the job centre and sign a paper saying we are no longer partners but live at the same address?

 

Should I contest this result? I really do not want to move as when I find work again I will be paying for a room I never use, besides I cannot actually move right now as I am broke.

 

 

Also as myself and my girlfriend are now pennyiless at christmas what other option like hardship allowance etc could I recieve?

 

Thanks in advance

 

Help needed!

Edited by manchester12
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all - I am am new to this forum so hope I am in the right place for this question -. I have recently applied for a job seekers allowance on the 10th of November. After waiting over a month for a reply I recieved a phone call from the decision maker stating that I was not intitled due to my partners income. She is a student recieving approximately £100 pounds a week. From this she must pay rent ,Food, petrol e.t.c. I am currenltly living with her. As she is my partner our incomes are combined when being accessed. I was aware of this but thought as she is a student there would be no way her income would affect my eligibility!

 

I am now in a very bad financial situation and as my claim has been rejected I am at a loss of what to do next. I realise I should not have said I had a partner, but I saw no reason to lie. I am really angry, confused and perplexed by how a student is supposed to support there partner! £100 is not much even for one person.

 

I have a couple of questions:

 

Is this possible or has there been a big mistake that I should chase up and appeal?

 

Should I go into the job centre and sign a paper saying we are no longer partners but live at the same address?

 

Should I contest this result? I really do not want to move as when I find work again I will be paying for a room I never use, besides I cannot actually move right now as I am broke.

 

 

Also as myself and my girlfriend are now pennyiless at christmas what other option like hardship allowance etc could I recieve?

 

Thanks in advance

 

Help needed

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just got this from Jobseeker's Allowance - general information - Social Security Agency

A personal allowance of contribution-based Jobseeker's Allowance will be payable for 182 days irrespective of capital or your partner's income.
So I think you should be going back to them unless I have misread it or you are not claiming contribution-based allowance
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi manchester12,

 

Yes, as unfair as it seems student loan is classed as an income and is taken in as household income for JSA purposes.

 

This doesn't apply if you claim JSA (contribution based) though. If you've been working in the two tax years (April-April roughly) before this year - in your case probably 05/06 and 06/07 - then you could claim JSA (contributions) only and get six months @ 60.50 a week if my memory serves.

 

Other than that there isn't much you can do. The decision is a law decision so an appeal won't help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you claimed housing and council tax benefit? You can still get partial help if your income is too high for JSA.

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

It might be worth you asking for a reconsideration (kind of an appeal) IF you feel that any expenses associated with your partners education have not been taken into account. For example does she have travelling expenses to and from college? Does she have to pay for books or tuition out of her grant/loan? There are set amounts that are allowed and they are not high but it might make a difference. the set rate for a couple both over the age of 25 is currently 94.95 per week and any income above that will nil you :( I can't remember off hand the rate for under 25's but needless to say it is less. 60.50 is the single person over 25 rate and under 25 it is 45.75 (I think!) will check and if I am wrong will post sorrect info tomorrow.

And as Zamzara said you can go to your local council and see if you can get help with council tax and rent.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 threads merged.

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...