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


  • Tweets

    No tweets were found.

  • Posts

    • Hi Can you put post up in PDF redacted your full Tenancy Agreement we need to see it all not just those clause As for the Estate Agency stating your Rent and Deposit is paying for the Redecoration of the property is wrong as this was there and the Landlords responsibility to claim those cost back from the Previous Tenants from either their Rents or Tenancy Deposit therefore the Redecoration cost is the Landlords Problem not not yours nor your Rent or Tenancy Deposit (until end of Tenancy) I would be writing to the Estate Agency asking further to your telephone conversation with XXXXXXXXX  on XX/XX/2025 you require Clarification as it was stated by your employee that I would not receive any rent nor deposit back as compensation as the Landlord was using this to Redecorate the Property. Neither my Rent nor Deposit should be used to Redecorate this Property due to the Previous Tenants as this should have been claimed back from the previous Tenants via either there Rents or Tenancy Deposit. Further to this I collected the keys as agreed on the 5th July 2025 to move into this Property with no mention at all from your Estate Agency that due to all the Redecoration ongoing when I went to that Property on that date I was not able to move into the Property as Agreed in me Agreement. You have then move my moving in date to 11th July 2025 therefore my Rent payments should commence from 11th July 2025 and I require confirmation from PPM Estate Agency and if refuse this full clarification as to why and what Housing Legislation and clauses from my Agreement. DO NOT PHONE and ask this unless you can record the call Send it by email but also follow it up in writing and get free proof of posting from the Post Office
    • Heat pump makers are ready to raise output, but demand is still sluggish.View the full article
    • The deal is part of the Trump administration's push for more aggressive adoption of artificial intelligence in the government.View the full article
    • Apologies for my laziness.  I did say I would read through the WS and suggest changes about two months ago ... but got lost in the fun of going on holiday twice. I promise that sleeves will be rolled up in the morning!
  • 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

I'm booking a holiday to LA for next October, 2009. I'm just browsing a few fares and I have noticed something called the Visa Waiver Programme. This is what it says...

 

Under the Visa Waiver Program, all international travellers who wish to travel to the United States from 1st January 2009 are now subject to enhanced security requirements. If you are travelling to the United states from the 1st January 2009, entry requirements have changed and a Visa Waiver Form must be completed and approved at least 72hours prior to departure.I have been to the USA before, in 2001, but I am worried now, as I have had 2 cautions when I was 13. I will be 36 by the time the holiday is coming up, and I'm wondering if these will show up on this enhanced security check, and if so, will it stop me from travelling? The cautions were not for drugs or anything to do with them, petty shoplifting of crisps and sweets from a shop! Oh, we we're all stupid when we were kids!!

 

I apologise if this is in the wrong forum. Thanks in advance...

Link to post
Share on other sites

If these were police cautions then I would be very surprised if they are even documented anywhere anymore.

I had a similarly stupid childhood and obtained a police caution at a similar age (would you believe for assault on a police officer - case of mistaken identity)

I have since undergone several police checks as I worked for many years as a nurse and had to undergo several security checks as I worked with children. This caution was never unearthed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reply! It's just, I read somewhere that even though convictions i.e. cautions were spent when you turned 17, I read that these still come up on an enhanced CRB check. I know this security check isn't the same, but was worried in case it still dredged it up.

 

Also, I did read somewhere on here that cautions that were given that long ago we're more than likely destroyed by police, but then someone else said they weren't. I would've turned 17 in August 1990, so that's 18 years ago.

 

I know there is a difference between a CRB check and an enhanced one, and it's kind of getting me a bit worried now, as I had totally forgotten about these silly cautions, but reading some posts about CRB's, and I've never been in a job where one was required, I'm starting to think I am now limited in the jobs I choose to take, for fear of these cautions being revealed in enhanced crb's, if I needed one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you may now find with the new president in place these 'visa requirements' will be thrown out the window, no way can they cope with the flood of requests within 72 hours, they normally take 3 weeks or even longer and thats dealing with enhanced CRB checks.

 

This silly restriction won't last that long - I would think that 18 years ago predates a lot of computerised records but it's best be safe than sorry.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you’re travelling to America next year and are eligible to travel under the US Visa Waiver Programme. From 12th January, you will have to apply online for permission to enter the United States.

 

The Visa Waiver Program consists of 34 countries including the UK, and enables qualifying citizens with a machine readable passport to visit the US for up to 90 days without applying for a visa, but the US is doing away with those fiddly green forms you fill in while hunched over on the plane, replacing them with ESTA (Electronic System for Travel Authorization), a compulsory online travel permit.

 

From mid-January, all visa waiver travellers must pre-register online at least 72 hours prior to travel to obtain an authorisation. Once obtained, visa waivers are valid for two years, or until your passport expires. Fail to do this, and you will not be allowed into the country.

 

The official ESTA website is https://esta.cbp.dhs.gov, and all visa waiver applicants should submit their information through this site alone.

WARNING TO ALL

Please be aware of acting on advice given by PM .Anyone can make mistakes and if advice is given on the main forum people can see it to correct it ,if given privately then no one can see it to correct it. Please also be aware of giving your personal details to strangers

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm booking a holiday to LA for next October, 2009. I'm just browsing a few fares and I have noticed something called the Visa Waiver Programme. This is what it says...

 

Under the Visa Waiver Program, all international travellers who wish to travel to the United States from 1st January 2009 are now subject to enhanced security requirements. If you are travelling to the United states from the 1st January 2009, entry requirements have changed and a Visa Waiver Form must be completed and approved at least 72hours prior to departure.I have been to the USA before, in 2001, but I am worried now, as I have had 2 cautions when I was 13. I will be 36 by the time the holiday is coming up, and I'm wondering if these will show up on this enhanced security check, and if so, will it stop me from travelling? The cautions were not for drugs or anything to do with them, petty shoplifting of crisps and sweets from a shop! Oh, we we're all stupid when we were kids!!

 

I apologise if this is in the wrong forum. Thanks in advance...

 

Just a word of caution.....

 

As you have been arrested (the date of which is irrelevant - the question which you have to answer to be eligible for the VWP is 'Have you ever been arrested...') you will not be eligible to travel without applying for a Visa and attending an interview at the US Embassy.

 

Have a look HERE and complete the wizard to see what you need to travel to the USA. The questions are pretty clear and state that any arrest, whether leading to conviction or not (and especially as a caution is effectively a conviction as it involves an admission of guilt) for anything more than a minor traffic matter, disqualifies the traveller from the Visa Waiver Programme.

 

Yes it could be argued that the cautions may not show up so you might as well try to bluff it, but the fact is that our Government have given the US Government access to a frightening amount of information and I personally would not want to try and 'wing' it if I was spending that much on a holiday - there are simply too many anecdotal cases where people have been refused entry (and permanently barred) into the US for not declaring. We are talking about US law here, so the fact that convictions may become 'spent' in the UK is completely irrelevant - in terms of entry to the US, the fact that a person has a caution, arrest or conviction 10, 20 or even 50 years ago MAY be relevant if you lie about it to enter the US.

Any advice given is done so on the assumption that recipients will also take professional advice where appropriate.

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

DONATE HERE

 

If I have been helpful in any way - please feel free to click on the STAR to the left!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks sidewinder, that was what I was afraid of. I can understand their security concerns, but a 13 yr old stealing some sweets isn't a threat to national security, is it?! But, I suppose we have to abide by their laws, no matter how daft they seem. I suppose I'll have to go through procedure and see what happens. Obviously, I could take the risk and try bluff it, but like you said, if there's a chance I could get refused entry and all that, it's not really worth it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Just a little update. A friend of mine and her husband have just booked a holiday to New York in october. She's a microbioligist, and he's high up in the railway service, so they are both honest, respectable people. Now, I n the conversation last week, I asked if they knew about this visa waiver scheme. They hadn't and both laughed at it and thought I was winding them up when I said even if you were a kid and got a caution, you have to go to the US embassy in London for an interview, and even then, you're not guaranteed a visa.

 

She then told me that she got a police caution for possession of a joint when she was 19 (she's 33 now), so a drug offence, and her hubby got nicked shoplifting when he was 12! he wasn't cautioned though. My friend said that she can understand her having to attend an interview, as it is a drugs offence, but her husbands little misdemeaner when he was 12 sounded a bit ridiculous, so she called the embassy in London.

 

She said the guy she spoke to was really abrupt and not very nice. She explained that she knew she had to come for the interview, but did her husband need to, as he wasn't even cautioned, and the man said yes, He said the he has to go to the police station and get a copy of the arrest and bring it with him.

 

Now, he's the same age as me, 35, and funnily enough, I got a caution for shoplifting when I was 13, as explained in the first post, whereas he wasn't charged with anything. The chances are, there won't be a record of arrest, so in theory, nothing will come up on the computer, USA side. When my friend told this man at the embassy that the chance of there still being a record of arrest that happened 23-24 years ago, is probably next to none, the man said it wasn't his problem and if her husband wanted to visit the USA, he should try his damn best to get a record of it!

 

I shall post back up when I know what is happening with them, and see what the embassy has to say about a 12 yr old nicking sweets being a threat to national security!

Edited by skonk
spelling doh!!
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...