Well I declared the situation to my uni and my employer as soon as I received the summons. My employer actually laughed at the situation and it did not effect my employment with that company, though I was working as a health care assistant then, not a registered professional. My uni took it more seriously but eventually deemed that the conviction did not effect my ability to practice as a student nurse. I have only had one crb done since the conviction at the request of my uni and the conviction did not display on it. So, so far it has not caused me much trouble. However, I am due to qualify very soon and will be applying for jobs. I'm n

thewrongstuff, the DWP can take excessive lengths of time to process applications especially for those living overseas the good point about this is that at least you are continuing to receive your IB, so might be best to focus on that, rather than worrying about how long process is taking

Don't let the respondent take over, they seem to want to run the show. I'm not sure they go through the bundle, just read your statement. Get all your points across, spoon feed the judges, pretend they are thick and know nothing ( you really will be convinced that they are). Don't rest on your laurels because you have been told you have a strong case, work really hard to show it's strong and why. How long is it scheduled for. You may be lucky and they approach you with an offer, but don't bank on and be prepared. Good luck and please let us know how you got on.

Hi Frantic, I think the responsibility lies solely with the bank, as regards providing answers about how the property was sold for the amount it was. If you don't get enough info about this in the SAR response, a letter to the CEO would be my next move. In my opinion, they have no right to pass the buck on to the LPAR. The relationship was between you and the bank and the bank must account for the actions of anyone (the LPAR) acting on their behalf. Of course, you are still free to ask questions of the LPAR and you can confirm that the bank told you to approach them for answers. You will probably have to give the bank ano

It's not in the new regulations. Section 66 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 preserves the current rules and regulations of the relevant debt recovery action where, before 6th April 2014, goods have been distrained or executed against, or made subject to a walking possession agreement. This means that if goods have been levied for council tax, business rates, parking penalties or a magistrates' courts fine before 6th April, then the new regulations will not come into force in respect of those cases - regardless of whether a walking possession agreement is in force or not. For magistrates' courts fines, of course, there is

IMEI number International Mobile Equipment Identifier number : 15 digits. Type *#06# on a GSM phone (If it hasn't yet been stolen!) Check the box and receipt if it has ..... (Bought in an Apple Store Apple's receipt does show the IMEI, other retailer's receipts may). Many years ago it was easier to change the IMEI (in fact a law was brought in to make it an offence to change an IMEI +/- posses equipment that enabled you to do so ). More recently it had become much harder to change an IMEI making the 'blacklist' of stolen IMEI more useful - at least in those countries that monitor the register of such. It doesn't preve

If you go to the Financial Ombudsman they will expect you to be returned to a position that you would have been had the charges not been applied. (so you should work out all the charges applied to the account plus the interest they would have charged on those charges) The FOS' usual compensation is between £300-£500. Have you had a look at the Ombudsman website to see if there is a similar situation to see how the Ombudsman resolved it ? They have quite a few examples

Agreed. The aim is to prevent a successful prosecution if possible. If that fails and you get convicted THEN is the time to tell your employer and regulatory body. Different if you were charged with murder, but here there is still the chance you can get them not to proceed!

So. let's try again eh. point 1 is that she offered to do part time on a lower paygrade where there are always vacancies. Every company, even those who don't have a continuous turnover of staff, have to cover for holidays, sick leave, maternity (especially in this sort of business of telesales) so there's always a few empty desks. There wouldn't have to be any adjustment in working practices to enable this. This is an offer by her to take a lower paid job to make a suitable compromise and eliminate any potential managerial shortfall. Surely there's a responsibility placed on them to consider this and if they refuse that offer to expla

they are offering a discount what does tell you about the legality issues? if it were real, why offer a discount? dx

total crap they cant do anything of the sort for a supposed gov't debt. bet they didn't tell you they'd poss need a CCJ FIRST mind? the ONLY PEOPLE that could go legal on this in the legal aid system [ the owner] IMHO you need to TOTALLY IGNORE the rossers. they have you over a barrel cause you been on the phone to them I bet!! oh and READ THE LETTER PROPERLY it does NOT say WILL anywhere dx

No problem:- http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/complaints-appeals/how-to-complain/make-complaint.htm http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/factsheets/complaints-factsheet.pdf