How, for the love of god, am i supposed to access the templates if i don't have sufficient access to them? Surely this kind of defeats the purpose of having them in the first place if only some can access but others can't? That's the whole point of SAR templates...so everyone can access them.

Thank you, i am re-formatting my post here, hopefully i can edit it to accomodate images. Here are the images without downloading...i hope. P.S. I give up, i can't seem to get it to work, if anyone can help, would be apreciated. P.P.S. Thank you for whoever re-titled this, i am sorry for the lack of words at the moment, and the poor grammer of my post, but i'm so angry and frustrated at the moment, all common sense seems to have left me. I'll be back to normal in a few days, once i got my head round it, and then i can explore options of how to aleviate this problem and what happens next. As it stands, my aim at this moment is to make people aware of any potential problems with SKY, and to be aware of thier public rights to question such things, and never back down if the law is on your side:)

For those people that were transfered from O2 to SKY, beware of what SKY is trying to do, they are trying to make you pay for services you are NOT getting. Here is my story: Everything was ok, that is, until I received the bill. On 6th Febuary 2014, I received an e-mail, saying, Welcome to sky, entitled Confirmation of your payment details. I read it, because I didn't actually confirm anything with sky regarding such details. Plus, they were already taking money from me, I presumed all was ok. What a shock I got, I am, or was, to be billed £32.42. I know I had received an e-mail, again from SKY, saying that February’s payment would not be collected, but unfortunately I deleted that mail, and I thought that e-mail was in part goodwill gesture for all the interruption during the switch-over from O2 to sky. you can imagine my shock to get a bill from them, not only for the days I did not get any service, but also for the month of March, which I will not be using anyway, because I asked for a MAC code and am transferring out from SKY. I looked at the bill very carefully, as I wanted to know exactly what I’m paying for, and this is the part I almost had a heart attack, I’m being billed for services...wait for it....that I’m NOT getting. Yes, you heard that right, it's not an error....I’ll be paying for services, I'M NOT GETTING!!!! At this point, I’m fuming, I’m ready to go pvp on someone. I contacted SKY, and their excuse was something along the lines that. ..I’m paying an excess for those people that want the package to make it more attractive to get it. I'm paying for something I’m not getting to make it attractive to someone else? Um...I don't think so. This was not part of the contract I didn't sign or agree to, nor was it ever explained to me in advance of moving over to SKY. If it had been, I wouldn't have moved or let it go ahead over to SKY in the first place. I made a few posts and rant on facebook page and on the phone. All to no avail. However, SKY is well informed that I will NOT be paying the bill, nor will any such bill ever be paid for by me at any time to anyone. If SKY wishes to pursue this bill, I’ll be charging legal services at minimum wage, per hour. I am charging minimum wage because I’m not legally trained, but I do know some people that are, and will have no problem pursuing it all the way to court. I have to charge a fee, because this is wasting my time and effort, plus, it's like me paying for their imaginary services I’m not getting, I’m applying an imaginary charge for my time and effort. overall, I’m very disgusted with SKY, hiding fees and charging for rubbish that it's there, I call that fraud. At very least, it's misleading and borderline theft. will use any and all legal avenues to pursue this, and I will go to the high court if needed. I have cancelled all direct debits and standing orders concerning sky, and I’ll see you in court.

First of all, thank you all for replying, and after reading just a few of your comments, i feel something has to be said. Vanquis, as we by now know, are part of the provident group, basically their credit card division. No major problem there, since provident have been lending money pretty much since before credit cards were normal thing. Provident themselves have been subject to many complaints, and grievances, by many people, and so has almost all credit card companies, basically, any financial institution has always had one complaint or other, that is a fact of life, even they can't please everyone. With all and ANY credit card, how you run your credit card account, is vital. Not only for you, but gives the credit card company a sort of reference to how your account will be run. Of course, all good credit card companies will, or should give some basic advice at the time you open your account, and i am guessing most of us go " yea yea, just give me the card" and almost ignore the small print. Also, at the time of opening your account, or even just applying, you should have done your homework, and you would be fully aware of the interest rate, and that is especially important if there is any mention of the word "variable". By definition, variable means "An element, feature, or factor that is liable to vary or change.", and so by reading one thing on a leaflet, that was printed probably 6 months ago, might not be the same as, for example, the main website of Vanquis, which can be updated almost instantly to reflect current conditions. Doing research and finding out the latest news about any credit card BEFORE you apply is just as important as accepting the terms and conditions. There is no point complaining about interest rates AFTER you signed up, you made that choice, and so it's not the companies fault that you didn't research it. Vanquis are by far NOT the worst ones out there, and ever since these new micro loans came on the scene, i seen interest rates of 4000%+. So 39%, 49%...even 59% seems reasonable to me, especially if your a credit risk in the first place. If anything, Vanquis can help you repair your credit. Yes, i am glad they constantly contact you, even if you go over your limit by 1p, they constantly contact you, borderline harassment, but that is a good thing, some people need that extra kick to get on top of their finances, and i can't fault them for that. If your a credit risk, through no fault of your own, example..no credit history at all, then this could be a nice intro card, just to get your credit history started, and providing you maintain your account well, there should be no problem finding another card at a lower rate in the future. If your a credit risk, either through current debts, older bad debts, bankruptcy etc, then another credit card is not the solution, you need to talk to someone professional and legal regarding your debts, and get them cleared first, BEFORE even considering another card. This website and CAB are good starts for debt advice, but remember to support the CAB and this site once your out of debt, as a thank you. I can assure you all, if it wasn't for this website, and CAB, i wouldn't be sitting here now, debt free. Believe me, it makes all the difference to talk about your debt, and get them off your back, and the old saying still applies, your debts wont go away, they will always find you, you cannot run or hide. So, please, please if your in debt, seek the debt advice pages first, before even considering a credit card, of anyone.

First of all, i would suggest seeking help from the CAB, and taking all the paperwork you can get regarding this to them. This matter is not something the average person in society can deal with, since it's really complicated what you either owe, or don't owe. I'm sure, your like many many others here, that want to pay " what they owe"...after all, we are all decent citizens here, and we are not avoiding it. The councils and so called advisors, they like to confuse the issue beyond any reasonable doubt, so that they can fudge a few numbers and get more out of you. That's why you need professional advice from CAB. The CAB will rummage through what you owe, and what you dont owe, and they will give you a correct figure, and arrange some sort of payment plan to suit your finances, that way, your happy, the council get thier money, and you can concentrate on your move. As if moving home isn't stressfull enough, without the council on your back threatening you for something that you might or might not owe, and can't even get the right figures. That's all i can really suggest, but whatever happens, always seek legal and professional good advice, and with my experience, i recomend CAB.

Excelent news everyone - we have been granted permissions to have 4 cats:) After seeking advice from a lawyer, the council have, backed down and let us keep them. Our lawyer was confused as we were, how the council intended to prove " reasonableness " since they allowed 2, but not 4, and how they intended to convince a court of such actions. I guess the council were running around trying to think of all the rules they ever made to try and prove it, but couldn't. This is a massive milestone for us, and one that i'm extremely happy about. It goes to show that no matter how big they think they are, if you only question things more, you can achieve what you want:) There are3 rules we have to agree to, which we are advised are reasonable..1. The council visit us once a month 2. we keep the property clean and tidy 3. no other pets. Personally, to me, that is very reasonable, and i'm happy to agree to that. Obviously if we break any of them 3 conditions, the council can take action, and i'm sure they will want to get thier own back on me anyway, but i wont give them the satisfaction. I'll be on top of things now, and the amount od stress lifted from me is awesome, i am now able to concentrate of the more important things in life:) I would like to thank everyone here as well, for the support, and advice. Some of which i wouldn't have won without them, i thank you all:)

The good news is, we are not in arrears, nor have we ever been a problem tenant, in fact, even the saqme housing officers, including the managers of the local office claim we are " not in any trouble". This leads me to think no end of things, mostly...if we are not in trouble, what's the mystery..lol There is a lot of preasure to " close the case" which in my opinion is all about preformance targets, but i'm not interested in thier targets, i'm interested in the welfare and happiness of our family, which includes our cats. The reason i sugested the Misrepresentation act is becuase a tenancy agreement, in fact agreement in general is a contrat. We are in all theory in a contract, we agree to keep this place in a reasonable and presentable manner, and agree not to do anything dangerous to it or our neighbours. Also, we agree to pay rent, in exchange for living here, no matter in what for the rent is paid, it's still liable upon us to pay it. Therefore, a contract is needed to form basis to pay this rent, and of course the HA's responsibilities as well. So, being a contract, it's liable under Misrepresentation law, as far as i'm aware of, and since we were not given a chance to actually read it, nor understand it, then we had no prior knowledge of the rules regarding pets in properties. Therefore, the contract in all theory, is void, or voidable. However, i'm not unreasonable, i would prefer they just close the case and leave us alone, but you know the council, they wont let it drop and we will probally come worse off because of it, but i'm fighting this all the way, no matter what it takes. If anything, i hate " i know the rules backwards" people, they are there just to fill the statistics sheets.

Thank you for that, i may have got the exact Law to reflect this. Misrepresentation Act 1967 1967 CHAPTER 7 Source: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1967/7 An Act to amend the law relating to innocent misrepresentations and to amend sections 11 and 35 of the Sale of Goods Act 1893. [22nd March 1967] 1 Removal of certain bars to rescission for innocent misrepresentation.E+W Where a person has entered into a contract after a misrepresentation has been made to him, and— (a)the misrepresentation has become a term of the contract; or (b)the contract has been performed; or both, then, if otherwise he would be entitled to rescind the contract without alleging fraud, he shall be so entitled, subject to the provisions of this Act, notwithstanding the matters mentioned in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section. 2 Damages for misrepresentation.E+W (1)Where a person has entered into a contract after a misrepresentation has been made to him by another party thereto and as a result thereof he has suffered loss, then, if the person making the misrepresentation would be liable to damages in respect thereof had the misrepresentation been made fraudulently, that person shall be so liable notwithstanding that the misrepresentation was not made fraudulently, unless he proves that he had reasonable ground to believe and did believe up to the time the contract was made the facts represented were true. (2)Where a person has entered into a contract after a misrepresentation has been made to him otherwise than fraudulently, and he would be entitled, by reason of the misrepresentation, to rescind the contract, then, if it is claimed, in any proceedings arising out of the contract, that the contract ought to be or has been rescinded, the court or arbitrator may declare the contract subsisting and award damages in lieu of rescission, if of opinion that it would be equitable to do so, having regard to the nature of the misrepresentation and the loss that would be caused by it if the contract were upheld, as well as to the loss that rescission would cause to the other party. (3)Damages may be awarded against a person under subsection (2) of this section whether or not he is liable to damages under subsection (1) thereof, but where he is so liable any award under the said subsection (2) shall be taken into account in assessing his liability under the said subsection (1). Plus, since it was verbal, no written permissions at the time, then ( just about borderlines) Implied Terms Source: http://www.gillhams.com/articles/141.cfm General Application to Contracts The rule is of general application and terms may be implied into contracts of virtually any nature, involving arbitration, agency, building, technology licences, sales of goods, supply of services and real property. The implication of terms remains a matter of law for a court to decide with the guidance of established legal principle. When Terms are Implied into a Contract Terms may be implied by the facts of a particular case, which are considered to reflect the parties’ intentions. The general principles are that an implied term must: not contradict any express term of the contract be reasonable and equitable be necessary to give business efficacy to the contract, such that the contract cannot be effective without it so obvious that it goes without saying, and be capable of being clearly expressed. The factual background at the time of formation of the contract is the relevant time to consider whether the parties probably had the term in mind but did not express it, but probably would have expressed it, had it arisen in the court’s view of fairness or policy. I shall present these to the council as proof that we were missled and it was verbal permissions, so as far as we are aware, we had permissions. It may take a while to sort this problem out, so i'll make it clear that no cats will be re homed during the process, since it's ongoing, then i wait upon the result.

Also, contact your MP, newspapers, the full works.

Also. Implied Terms Source: http://www.gillhams.com/articles/141.cfm General Application to Contracts The rule is of general application and terms may be implied into contracts of virtually any nature, involving arbitration, agency, building, technology licences, sales of goods, supply of services and real property. The implication of terms remains a matter of law for a court to decide with the guidance of established legal principle. When Terms are Implied into a Contract Terms may be implied by the facts of a particular case, which are considered to reflect the parties’ intentions. The general principles are that an implied term must: not contradict any express term of the contract be reasonable and equitable

I have something that might help. Misrepresentation Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misrepresentation Misrepresentation means a false statement of fact made by one party to another party and has the effect of inducing that party into the contract. For example, under certain circumstances, false statements or promises made by a seller of goods regarding the quality or nature of the product that the seller has may constitute misrepresentation. A finding of misrepresentation allows for a remedy of rescission and sometimes damages depending on the type of misrepresentation. There are two types of misrepresentation in contract law, fraud in the factum and fraud in inducement. Fraud in the factum focuses on whether the party in question knew they were creating a contract. If the party did not know that they were entering into a contract, there is no meeting of the minds, and the contract is void. Fraud in inducement focuses on misrepresentation attempting to get the party to enter into the contract. Misrepresentation of a material fact (if the party knew the truth, that party would not have entered into the contract) makes a contract voidable. According to Gordon v. Selico[55] it is possible to make a misrepresentation either by words or by conduct, although not everything said or done is capable of constituting a misrepresentation. Generally, statements of opinion or intention are not statements of fact in the context of misrepresentation. Both an order for specific performance and an injunction are discretionary remedies, originating for the most part in equity. Neither is available as of right and in most jurisdictions and most circumstances a court will not normally order specific performance. A contract for the sale of real property is a notable exception. In most jurisdictions, the sale of real property is enforceable by specific performance. Even in this case the defenses to an action in equity (such as laches, the bona fide purchaser rule, or unclean hands) may act as a bar to specific performance. Related to orders for specific performance, an injunction may be requested when the contract prohibits a certain action. Action for injunction would prohibit the person from performing the act specified in the contract. Misrepresentation Act 1967 1967 CHAPTER 7 Source: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1967/7 An Act to amend the law relating to innocent misrepresentations and to amend sections 11 and 35 of the Sale of Goods Act 1893. [22nd March 1967] 1 Removal of certain bars to rescission for innocent misrepresentation.E+W Where a person has entered into a contract after a misrepresentation has been made to him, and— (a)the misrepresentation has become a term of the contract; or (b)the contract has been performed; or both, then, if otherwise he would be entitled to rescind the contract without alleging fraud, he shall be so entitled, subject to the provisions of this Act, notwithstanding the matters mentioned in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section. 2 Damages for misrepresentation.E+W (1)Where a person has entered into a contract after a misrepresentation has been made to him by another party thereto and as a result thereof he has suffered loss, then, if the person making the misrepresentation would be liable to damages in respect thereof had the misrepresentation been made fraudulently, that person shall be so liable notwithstanding that the misrepresentation was not made fraudulently, unless he proves that he had reasonable ground to believe and did believe up to the time the contract was made the facts represented were true. (2)Where a person has entered into a contract after a misrepresentation has been made to him otherwise than fraudulently, and he would be entitled, by reason of the misrepresentation, to rescind the contract, then, if it is claimed, in any proceedings arising out of the contract, that the contract ought to be or has been rescinded, the court or arbitrator may declare the contract subsisting and award damages in lieu of rescission, if of opinion that it would be equitable to do so, having regard to the nature of the misrepresentation and the loss that would be caused by it if the contract were upheld, as well as to the loss that rescission would cause to the other party. (3)Damages may be awarded against a person under subsection (2) of this section whether or not he is liable to damages under subsection (1) thereof, but where he is so liable any award under the said subsection (2) shall be taken into account in assessing his liability under the said subsection (1).

Thank you so very much, that was extremely helpfull, i am contacting as many authorities and people as i can, in writing of course. I am a lot calmer than i was, and the rant i had with them is sorted out, we can at least talk now. I did contact the local papers, they were no help, but i havent given up on that yet. I have wrote to my MP, and almost all national medid newspapers and TV channels. The thing is, i believe this is a more underlying problem, and i don't expect it to affect just me, so it needs to be brought to attention somewehre. The problem arrises from breeding, anyone and everyone can breed domestic animals. Given the stats on litters of kittens and pups, the figures are quite damning. What needs to be done is select breeders, where certain places only can breed animals, and sell them of course. This will lead to more decent and respect for having a pet, and what it means to have one. These select breeding places can inform and investigate weather a property is suitable, and give no end of advice on how to look after and so on. They would be a hub of info and help, which in turn would satisfy the councils, sort of achieving thier requirements and the owners. This in turn would also help the animal charities, especially re-homing, because there wouldn't be so many pets, they could sspend more quality time and effort re-assuring the public and helping out where needed. Instead, most animal homes are little more than a last resort, a death row for some animals, which is wrong. Animals are not a commodity, the public needs to know that. Still, not that i had my rant...lol, i'll get back to seeing what i can do:)

highly apreciated, i will try those idea's. It is a tough time, stressfull for us, and will be for the cats when tthey go, it's never easy to explain to a cat they have to be re-homed cause of humans being a pain..lol

That's exactly why i like the post office account, it has no features like a bank...including bank fees. For that 80p difference, compare that to the £20 or up to £40 bank charge...i know what i would pay. Of course the DWP dont like it, it means they have to pay, and ultimately the tax payer. Meanwhile..the banks, that still cannot define a reasonable excuse as to how they can charge bank fees, hide behind thier wealth and red tape. There is no reason why you can't have a post office account and a bank account for normal day to day tansactions, makes sence to me, plus it's how i was able to be debt free, since i no longer pay bank charges, i can use that money to pay other things that need paying, like food and important bills.

I have been trying to find the origional tennancy agreement, but can't find it at the moment, soon as i do i'll be able to post again and let others know. I'm really in a pickle as to what to do, it's upsetting me and my partner no end, not to mention costing a fortune in phone calls. No cat charity place seems to have any places available to re-home our 2 cats, we tried everywhere, RSPCA, cats paws, cats protection...and about 20 more all oround the UK. If anyone can help legally, or can help re-home 2 of our cats, some advice would be extremely helpfull. Also, this is not only affecting me, i know of at least 7 others affected by this latest clamp down on animals. It's not fair, it's as if the council are activly condoning animal cruelty, because some people are just abandoning thier animals in the street. So it's causing a problem all over the place.

Victoria, i do appologise, but doing nothing about your debts...that will never solve any problem. Like i said, any debts, no matter how big or small, will not go away, you can't just hide under a carpet and think you can start again. Even if you run for the next 20 years, they will find you and catch up with you. Plus, it's slightly immoral to run from debts, it sort of don't give incentive not to do it again. The objective here, i am guessing, is to establish if there is any debt, who to, how much and to make payments in accordance with the situation the OP is in. I don't think anyone is disputing that circumstances do change, and so the OP is mabee looking for options, and a legal and responsible way to deal with it. That to me is very respectfull, and responsible, there no court in this land that can argue otherwise. I'm sure the debtors could argue, but then again...they don't care, it's not thier job to care...just to get the money. At least the OP has made some arrangements so far, and following advice from the company he chose to help him, that's all that really matters, as long as he or she follows that advice, it's all done legally, and nothing much the debtors can really do. They might try bully tactics and other means....but what i would do is point the debts to the company i'm dealing with, and tell them to talk to them if there is a problem, since they are dealing with it. As long as the OP keeps his or her commitments to the company that is helping him with debt...then it could drag on for years and years or unless circumstances change.

debtline is good, if the CAB recomended them to you..then you are doing the right thing. What the CAB wont tell you though is what charges you may or may not get back. This is how it works....you will pay the full amount of your debt no matter what, regardless of if you are due any charges back. Once you have paid your full debt you owe, then you can persue the companies and creditors after for thier charges. Since you will have proof that you paid the charges, who you paid to, and how much, there is no way the courts can dispute beyond all reasonable doubt, that you didn't pay it. Therefore you are owed money:)

oh...lol, my bad. Another thing to be sure of is...your debts will not go away, make no illusion or assumption about it, trust me, i have tried. I had a debt from 1999 still find me, and believe me, they will. You don't need to obtain your credit file for them to find you, as long as you have one...they will find you. Almost all companies nowadays will do a credit check, and soon as they do, it's marked on your file as a search, it's also how junk mail firms find you...lol. That and the electrol role, they can pretty much find you wherever you go and do. If you have applied to open a bank account, a phone line, mobile phone....they all do searches and it's logged. It's not if they find you...but when.

The first thing i would like to suggest is this, based on my experience and real life debt problem i have. While i was getting help from the CAB, the first thing to do is admit there is a problem, and that you are responsible for all your debts. Once you got to that stage, then the recovery can begin. It's not easy, nothing ever is when dealing debts, but that is the first hurdle. Second of all, dont panick. Stress is the second biggest killer in the UK apart from cancer, so worrying about every phone call and letter wont help. Yes, the debt companies do preasurise you, that's thier job, they get paid to stress you out and panick you, this is a bully tactic, and one designed to make you make a mistake, and to make rash decisions there and then. Sometimes they make you make a choice that could actually worsen your debt, so above all, dont panick. Now, you should be in a more focused and bit more relaxed mood, and ready to deal with your debts, professionally and most important...legally. This step involves looking for the right places to get the right help for your specific debt advice. Don't just choose the first available debt help company, as there seems to be a whole new age of. " we can reduce your debt" with emphasis on reduce. You need the right help, the best and ones that are trusted and well known. On this occasion, i would suggest the CAB. For one, they offer impartial, and free advice. They will not judge you, nor harras you, and, should your debts be beyond thier help, they have advice and lists of places that can and will help. However, i would guess that 99.99% of the cases they get are perfectly helpable, including yourself. The CAB will probally want to go through your finances with you, so you both can establish who is owed what...but don't be alarmed....as soon as you got the help, and they start the case with you.....they will talk to your debtors directly..the phones calls will stop, as will the letters, as they should all go through the CAB. Any letters or phone calls you get after you get help, let the CAB know about it straight away and they can deal with it. That is only my advice, i would encourage you to explore as much options as possible, do not take my advice directly, please have a look around before making any choices.

First of all, i am no legal expert, but i know a bad thing when i see it. Surely the banks are not allowed to touch benefits because as it states on the benefit letters, the amount they award you is based on the income your allowed to have by law. If the law says your entitled to it, then the banks cannot reasonably touch it at source, i would have thought they wopuld have to ask you before taking any amount out from your account, and for what reason. Secondly...there is an account, that was set up quite intentionally, by the government, to recieve benefits. It's from the post office, called Post Offie Account, and the whole objective of that account is to recieve any benefits, or other payments from the government, or other officials...like inland revenue etc. I would like to suggest and recommend that people open up an account there, since you cannot go overdrawn, cannot do standing orders or direct debits, it's just a simple account, and there is no way you can get any bank charges. I already knew something like this would happen a long time ago, and have been almost harrassed by the banks to get my benefits paid to them, but i wont have any of it, because i knew they would interfear with it at some point. When the banks start getting desperate for me to transfer my benefits to them...i get suspicious. I hope you all get your money back, or at least some of it....and perhaps refer to getting bank charges bank forum on this site as well.

For the last 7, nearly 8 years, we have had 4 cats. Just recently, July 2010, we were abruptly told to remove them or face eviction. Here is the full story: In 2002 I moved into a new place in Blackpool, at the time, it was council owned, and there was no problems. A few weeks into my tenancy, I got 2 cats. I immediately went to the local office to inform them that I had indeed obtained 2 cats, and was it allowed in my tenancy agreement. The counter staff at that time reassured me that it was allowed and was OK providing they were informed, in which I was doing, so they were happy with that. I was happy with that too, so I continued as normal. A year later, in 2003, my partner moved in with me, and we met some of the neighbours in our block. Our neighbours had 2 cats as well, but a smaller property. In due course, their cats had kittens, and so 8 weeks later, they were running around trying to re-home them. We were delighted at the sight of 2 kittens, and so we took 2 kittens off their hands. Both myself and the neighbour went to the local housing office to inform them of the situation and to ask permissions. Again, myself and my neighbour were reassured that it was allowed, and permissions were given by the counter staff. At no point, either before, during or after signing the original tenancy agreement, were we told or reminded we had to have this permissions in writing, nor were we shown the exact ruling the council used at that time, or after. So since 2003, we assumed that we had full permissions to have 4 cats, and we were happy. At no stage were we consulted as to weather we had all female cats, and that we do not plan to have any other animals in this property. Nor did anyone bother to inquire that our cats are fully neutered and couldn't have kittens even if they wanted to. Nor did anyone consider that we have no plans to get any more cats after our current ones pass away. Anyway, between that point and mid November 2009, I had to go into a different accommodation, to help with my depression. This involved social services and other medical professionals, in fact probably involved a load of folk I never even heard of. As part of this rehab type thing, I had to be removed of the tenancy agreement, because you can't have 2 tenancies at the same time. My partner had to sign a new tenancy. This new tangency was with the all new Blackpool Coastal Housing. I was there when she signed it, and I swear down now, at no point was my partner shown or explained the rules of the tenancy. All they wanted was for her to sign it, without looking at it or understanding it. It was as if she was signing under duress. I was basically told to be quiet, because it was my partner that was signing it, not me. So even I didn't have that option. Even in the months leading up to this, social services knew we had 4 cats, and it wasn't a problem then either. While I was in care, it was getting more and more evident, that there was no support for my partner, and I got frustrated. I got even more frustrated that my medications were being messed with, so I had a few disagreements. Finally in December I left, I had enough of the place, plus it wasn't helping me one little bit. They got annoyed that I so called "bribed" them into getting my meds back, but I wasn't there for medication review, I was there to get help. However, since December 2009 and July 2010, nothing was said, and as far as I’m concerned everything was back to normal. That was, until someone from Blackpool coastal Housing sent a letter saying..we want to come round to inspect the property. I never seen that before, and apparently they do this every year, so we let them come round, just out of curiosity if nothing else. That was when the sparks fly, they came bursting in, and immediately picked up that we had 4 cats, and barked lout orders, in no uncertain terms " get rid of the cats or face eviction". As you could imagine, I went ballistic, I was in no way going to tolerate that sort of attitude from anyone..I don't care who they work for. There were a few other issues that needed addressing, which we have solved, that was the easy bit, but to come into my domain and tell us to remove our cats..I was having none of it. So I went to the local office, and I created an argument of my own, I returned the favour They didn't like it, so how do they expect me to like it. After a few letters here and there, we had to put into writing that we want permissions to have 4 cats, so we did, and it was refused. I heard some pretty good excuses in my time, but the best ones were to come, including “ it's got a shared entrance” and “ too small”. In a few weeks we eventually agreed to 2 cats, and I put that in writing, and that was approved. So, we are at a crossroads now, where to re-home 2 cats, especially in a society that has far too many cats and dogs, even the animal charities are overwhelmed, to bursting. I had 1 place told me that if the council seen their place..it would be shut down due to overcapacity. That shows you the state of things. Best of all though, I contacted the Blackpool Gazette, the local newspaper, as I thought it would be a nice story for them, plus to show my anger, and all they said was “is it in the tenancy agreement”...I replied yes, because we had been shown it after someone came round and explained it. They said they would send a reporter round...not heard from them at all. I thought it would make a nice story, since I’m not the only one affected by this issue in the whole of Blackpool, or if I am, then that's a whole new ball game altogether. It's as if the newspaper is bias towards the council, which would explain the response I got from a phone call about 3 days earlier, in which I was told “good luck” by a council employee, when I said I was going to the newspaper. So what are we supposed to do? Personally, I think this is a load of bollocks, the economy is in crisis and all Blackpool Coastal Housing are worried about is if I got 4 cats or not. Someone needs to get their priorities right. If anyone can help...especially in full English Law, weather there is anything I can do legally, then please contact me. You may love or hate any animals ... but lets put it this way, some people, me included, love their animals, and do take care of them, sometimes better than myself, they are treated as one of the family. My question is this...what would you do if someone tried to take away your child or pets...without a genuine or reasonable excuse? That I leave to you. Disclaimer: Under no circumstances am I, or anyone else suggesting or claiming that Blackpool Coastal Housing is good or bad, right or wrong, I am only giving the correct and true facts that actually happened to me and my partner in this case, weather it's ongoing or not.

I currently have the set, i ordered it, and believe me, the first few coins, it seems to take forever, and will never end. The bonus is, it's a lovely set when it's completed, plus you'll get another coin, never minted before, and never to be released again, upon completion...absolutely free. This is my second set now fron LMO, and they are pretty good with thier coins, they give you exactly what they claim. The only drawback, is the amount of marketing mail, it can get really frustrating at times. but if you phone them and let them know, they will take you off thier marketing lists.

it might take a few weeks..even months...but once you got the innitial complaints in to the right places...trading standards and the police....the rest should be easy..and all legal red tape after that. I know you will find him eventually...if not, he will surface again somewhere. He might not come back to your mom, but at least your ready for him if he does, and tell your friends and other relations...to watch out for him, and talk to thier parents etc. So they too can be aware of the situation, and call the police if they find him. sooner or later, no matter where he goes, he will be caught...and when he is...your time will come:)

I'm starting to think that the first 2 cheques were used to either open an account at a local check cashing place, or used as identity to open accounts or use accounts at these cheque cashing places. If you know someone you can trust, and mabee less than employed....mabee they can scout these places occasionally for activity, and help identify this person. It's not illegal to do your own detective work, however, if you do see him, and identify him...do not aproach him, or cause a scene...cause that is illegal..lol. Instead, try not to let him know your on to him, get his description, and get the police right away....from there, the investigations begin and you got a strong court case then, and it's all in your favor:) By the time you find him...that's if you do...your details and complaints will have been registered with either trading standards or the police...or both, and that is plenty good enough to start procedings:) Even if your the very first person to have this done to them, then you can take personal procedings against him, that's if you find him. You would have to act on behalf of your mom in that situation, and get all the legal advice you can about small claims court...etc. But that's only if you get the right person...so be carefull, don't want to accuse the wrong person, or it will backfire big time.

first thing to do, is re-assure your mom, that she is not at fault. That is important, because these conning noobs, they rely on the fact your mom might not be able to defend herself in these situations, and forces a fast and insecure deal. Second, i would go straight to trading standards, inform them there is a potential [EDIT] praying on elderly people, to [problem] them out of loads of money, and falsifying details to obtain that money. Inform them of the false phone numbers and false offices, and all the detials that is unique to your case. The more details they get, the more they can possibly trace him, or at least have the power to act, should he surface again. Then, i would go to the police, regardless of what they can or can't do....as your mother is a victim here...plus you pay taxes to keep these guys and gals in thier job, so might as well. You will also need a police log number, this is vital, and major important. Even if they do nothing, it is then registered as a complaint, should trading standards want to persue this guy, then they have the police record as evidence this happened, and can get his butt to court faster. Finally, as a precaution...try and re-asure your mom to call you, or another family member, no matter who comes to the door. Ask her to call you, have someone there and present in any sort of doorstep challenge, and that way, no-one can pull a fast one on your mom or family members. If in any doubt at all, or if anyone feels preasured at thier own door, then it's a dodgy deal..and say NO. Don't matter if they selling the planet, no, no, and no again...if i don't know them, i don't pay them or give details. Also, go to the bank..and your not asking them to help you...your telling them. They are the ones that are supposed to be good with money...so be good with it...and find your mom's money already. They must know what bank account it went to...or where the checques were cashed? they may say...not your problem...but i'm sure with a bit more legal power...mabee a solicitor...that will have enough ooompff to deliver the legal rubbish they need:) I hope some of this is helpfull....but always seek legal advice from somewehre like CAB or another place if in doubt. Never trust anyone..especially if they come out of the blue at your door...and all of a sudden ask for money, and also online:) The first 2 cheques were a test...to see if they could get money off your mom, the last one was the stinger....i appologise for that bit, but that is how these con buggers work, and if they want my details..they got to pay me...not the other way round..lol