Plus, quite simply, whether legal or not, it is a matter of morality, something Gideon obviously lacks. But then, we already knew that.

On the 17th of February?

Well, it's illegal for a trader to sell goods "sold as seen". You don't have much recourse left, it's a 13 years old car, things can go wrong at any time, unfortunately. My (tentative) advice would be to approach the dealer telling him that you know that "sold as seen" is illegal and that you will report him to TS for doing this, see if that softens him up a bit , suggest he pays back an amount, say equivalent to the cost of the repairs? But in all honesty, it would be a bluff, if he says no, then I'm afraid that's pretty much it.

Amen.

You're putting the cart before the horses. Wouldn't you rather be able to claim for your stuff back rather than going down the misrepresentation route? Please post the T&Cs of your policy. Please post a screenshot of the site from which you read the wrong amounts. (blank out the company if you really don't want us to know, but I fail to see why it's such an issue) You want positive legal advice? This is it. Make sure you have covered all the issues before you engage on a long and potentially expensive lawsuit.

That's rich, coming from someone who quotes the Mail as his source of information. Anyway, someone has to criticise the tories, because I sure don't see the Murdoch press or the Beeb doing it!

And this was a party political broadcast on behalf of Brighthouse...

For all the big people who think it's no big deal, let me tell you a little story... A friend of my daughter's (all her friends come to me when they need any kind of semi-legal opinion, even now!) contacted me a few months back, she was absolutely terrified. She had been confronted by a security guard who wanted to check her receipt (sounds familiar?), she had her screaming baby with her needing changing and feeding, so she asked why, he got stroppy, intimidated her, forcibly marched her (and screaming baby) to the office, rifled through her bag, took her personal info, and then let her go with a "And remember, I know where you live now!". She got home shell-shocked and immediately contacted me. I of course advised her, pretty much on the lines of nearly anyone here, told her to complain straight away etc... The supermarket did take it seriously and said they'd investigate and get back to her. The next day, the guy turned up at her door (thankfully, she didn't open, only looked through the peephole), ranting and raving that he'd been sacked and that she'd better withdraw her complaint straight away so he could get his job back (!), banging on the door, threatening... She had to call the police, of course, but she was traumatised for weeks afterwards, worried he was going to come back and take revenge... An extreme case, I grant you. But the point is, regardless as to whether we feel OP was reasonable or not in the first place, that is a moral judgement, and we're not here to pass moral judgement. Did the OP have a legal right not to show the receipt to someone who could have been anybody (having a high vis jacket could be a clever ploy for a crook after all, hiding in plain sight)? YES Did the OP have a legal right not to show the receipt to someone even after they had reached the conclusion that person was indeed a store employee? YES Did the employee have the right to detain the OP for refusing to show the receipt? NO Is the store legally at fault? 100% YES. Simple when you just break it down in legal facts instead of getting mired in moral opinions.

Here are some news about the PIP assessments-to-be... http://www.disabilitywales.org/1168/4430 So, they won't let Capita offer to record, but they admit (rather grudgingly, if I am any judge!) that WE can.

Semantics... "just" closed to new applicants is pretty much the same as "scrapped" to them, in the same way that DLA is being scrapped for most people between 16-64, the fact some of them won't lose it until 2015 doesn't make it any less scrapped. It's about as worthy of debate as the govt insisting that the bedroom tax should be called the spare room subsidy, the end result will be the same.

April 2013 – launch of Universal Credit pathfinder October 2013 – national launch of Universal Credit New claimants: They will be able to make claims for Universal Credit from October 2013, while claims for existing benefits and credits will be gradually phased out. From April 2014, all new claims will be for Universal Credit. Existing claimants: They will move onto Universal Credit in line with a phased approach that we expect to have completed by the end of 2017. (from DWP's website)

Sorry, I can't tell you more than this, except that Paula Peters is an activist in my neck of the woods, and she was at this "PIP stuff" from which she wrote the notes. I can ask her if she'd mind shedding some light on the origins. Edit: I think that what they're saying and what will happen in reality are 2 different things, after all, we have heard the "not allowed" line often enough and yet, we pushed that back bit by bit. I *think* that they're referring to PIP and recording rather than reneging on the WCA part, and I guess that they would like to try and stop PIP claimants from gettign a recordign so will use the same amount of disinformation and outright lies as they did with the WCAs...

It was you, was it? I saw that post, lol. I'm sorry, I don't have the time to do that these days or I would have. If someone else has the time and energy, great!

Apologies for cap letters, just C&P from FB group Atos Miracles: BREAKING NEWS ON BENEFIT CAP....courtesy of Paula Peters who was present for PIP stuff today! as you all know the cap is: £350 single person £500 couples and single parents. Exemptions are ESA Support Group,DLA/PIP those benefits included in the cap are the following; JSA SDA HOUSING BENEFIT COUNCIL TAX BENEFIT ESA WRAG GROUP INCOME SUPPORT INC DISABILITY PREMIUM INCAPACITY BEN BEREAVEMENT ALLOWANCE CARERS ALLOWANCE WIDOWS ALLOWANCE THIS CAP WILL INCLUDE ALL THE ABOVE SO YES YOU WONT GET MORE A WEEK THAT £350 OR £500 TO PAY EVERYTHING YOU NEED AND THOSE WORKING ON LOW WAGES IF THEY EARN OVER THE CAP ,IT WILL BE TAKEN OFF ANY HB YOU GET AT PRESENT UNIVERSAL CREDIT: WORKING TAX CREDITS SCRAPPED APRIL2014 ATOS NOT ALLOWING AUDIO ASSESSMENT RECORDINGS BUT YOU CAN USE A ADVOCATE TO SPEAK ON YOUR BEHALF NEW CLAIMS START OCT BUT MAYBE DELAYED INDEF/LIFETIME 2015 ONUS ON CLAIMANT TO GATHER EVIDENCE PIP WILL USE ONLINE TRACKER SYSTEM AND THOSE WHO CANNOT HEAR OR SPEAK WILL BE ABLE TO USE A APPOINTTEE WITH CLAIMANTS PERMISSION. YOU WILL GET PHONECALL USING TRACKER FOR ALL OTHERS WHICH YOU WILL BE ASKED A LOT QUESTIONS (18PAGES) BEFORE THE CLAIM FORM IS SENT OUT. 3MTH QUALIFYING TEST FOLLOWED BY 9MTH PROSPECTIVE TEST THIS MEANS A YEAR IN TOTAL AND THOSE WITH FLUCTUATING CONDITIONS WILL BE AFFECTED BY THIS NONSENCE INFO RECEIVED FROM KATHERINE MARSHALL CAM PATEL WHO ARE BOTH PARTNERSHIP DEVELOPMENT MANAGERS FOR SOUTH EAST /LONDON I realise it's not the clearest of posts, I think someone was taking notes as they were going along, but it might give someone a heads up, even if it raises as many questions as it answers, so to speak.

. . Apologies for the caps, I have just copied and pasted from a post on FB group "Atos Miracles": BREAKING NEWS ON BENEFIT CAP....courtesy of Paula Peters who was present for PIP stuff today! as you all know the cap is: £350 single person £500 couples and single parents. Exemptions are ESA Support Group,DLA/PIP those benefits included in the cap are the following; JSA SDA HOUSING BENEFIT COUNCIL TAX BENEFIT ESA WRAG GROUP INCOME SUPPORT INC DISABILITY PREMIUM INCAPACITY BEN BEREAVEMENT ALLOWANCE CARERS ALLOWANCE WIDOWS ALLOWANCE THIS CAP WILL INCLUDE ALL THE ABOVE SO YES YOU WONT GET MORE A WEEK THAT £350 OR £500 TO PAY EVERYTHING YOU NEED AND THOSE WORKING ON LOW WAGES IF THEY EARN OVER THE CAP ,IT WILL BE TAKEN OFF ANY HB YOU GET AT PRESENT UNIVERSAL CREDIT: WORKING TAX CREDITS SCRAPPED APRIL2014 ATOS NOT ALLOWING AUDIO ASSESSMENT RECORDINGS BUT YOU CAN USE A ADVOCATE TO SPEAK ON YOUR BEHALF NEW CLAIMS START OCT BUT MAYBE DELAYED INDEF/LIFETIME 2015 ONUS ON CLAIMANT TO GATHER EVIDENCE PIP WILL USE ONLINE TRACKER SYSTEM AND THOSE WHO CANNOT HEAR OR SPEAK WILL BE ABLE TO USE A APPOINTTEE WITH CLAIMANTS PERMISSION. YOU WILL GET PHONECALL USING TRACKER FOR ALL OTHERS WHICH YOU WILL BE ASKED A LOT QUESTIONS (18PAGES) BEFORE THE CLAIM FORM IS SENT OUT. 3MTH QUALIFYING TEST FOLLOWED BY 9MTH PROSPECTIVE TEST THIS MEANS A YEAR IN TOTAL AND THOSE WITH FLUCTUATING CONDITIONS WILL BE AFFECTED BY THIS NONSENCE INFO RECEIVED FROM KATHERINE MARSHALL CAM PATEL WHO ARE BOTH PARTNERSHIP DEVELOPMENT MANAGERS FOR SOUTH EAST /LONDON The highlight is my own. Looks like they're going to try and cut people off the recording requests before they're even made... B*stards. Ah well, if they "won't allow" them, looks like people will just have to do it themselves without permission then, won't they?

The government know very well that this is propaganda, after all, they're the ones feeding the false figures to the media, and even the public at large is going to soon find out that they all know more victims to this cruel set-up than "players", at which point a u-turn would make great political fodder, which is all they're interested in, not keeping up any promises or pledges, as we've all found out!

Actually.... DLA isn't going to disappear completely for a few years, you have to have all the kids to reach 16 and all the over 65s to kick the bucket. With that in mind, cynical ol' me actually thinks that as the omnishambles continues to develop and avalanche, the government may decide to u-turn on the life awards. It would make a good political election thing "see, we have listened to you!" and counter-act the accusations that they are only doing this to save money at the expense of the most vulnerable, would save them a bundle anyway as despite the propaganda, most people who are on indefinite awards are there for a good reason, so assessing them will be a vast waste of money in the main, and also because Motability is the largest leasee in the UK and the loss of the award will mean a massive drop for the car industry. I don't know, I can't see into the future, but I can't help feeling that the autumn 2015 set time is just that little bit too coincidental...

The latest I know about this is that, when people lose their entitlement when moving from DLA to PIP, they will have to give the car back, of course, but I hear noises that Mota will hive them 1 month's grace to make other arrangements and sort themselves out. (unconfirmed officially as yet) Sorry, forgot to say that for people who paid an advance on their car, they are entitled to a pro-rata refund if they lose the car before the lease is up.

Oh, there's a surprise. Not.

... Which means that until "soon" happens, OP should be placed in the Support group, seems perfectly logical to me.

Hi there. a) you don't need to pay to get a transcript done, you can do it yourself. Just make sure that you include a copy of the recording for the judge and the other party. b) don't ask permission, just do it. If the other side wants to argue it shouldn't be in the record, let them do the fight to get it thrown out rather than you fighting to get it in. Fait accompli is a powerful thing. c) if the question about the legality of it arises, assert your right under the DPA s.36 exemption. You recorded the assessment for the aim of your personal affairs, and benefits and health, well, it doesn't come much more under personal affairs than that. Fact is, despite various misguided posts to the contrary on the Internet, you do have an absolute right to record, covertly or not, and if you need to use it as supporting evidence, well, they would have to come up with something pretty original to get the judge not to include it, so just make sure you are squeaky clean throughout, include it in your bundle complete with transcript, make sure you send copies to all parties and let them know you wil lbe using it at the hearing, and that's that! Good luck, let us know how you get on.

The bedroom tax doesn't only apply to council houses.

Apart from the semantics, you mean? None whatsoever. Semantically, however... Social Security - READ the two words. Understand what they contain. It's "security", so safety, a net, protection. "Social" = part of our society, something we all belong to. "Social Security" is inclusive, it's the opposite of the "something for nothing" message IDS and his media drones are hammering over and over. "Social Security" harks back to a time of unions, where people pay their dues and then get help if and when they fall on hard times. It contains the same key-word as "social contract", has the same language roots as "socialist", so is anathema to the "elite" which would rather eradicate anything to do with the lower classes helping each other. "Welfare", on the other hand, is despicable. Being on welfare is a term first coined in the USA and it carries with it visions of food coupons, handouts, leeching from the system, taking but never giving back or even putting in first. It has no apparent correlation to the money we have paid in through our National Insurance contributions (remember them? the other part of the social contract) and taxes. Being on Social Security means falling on hard times can happen to anyone, welfare means you have chosen a lifetime of mediocrity of laziness. The 2 terms encapsulate the strivers v scroungers rhetoric, although rhetoric is probably too nice, "propaganda" is more accurate, and that is why we should fight the easy to say label "welfare" and insist on using the words "Social Security", because if we forget to, soon we will only be left with their definition of welfare and will lose our social security, literally.

From the minimum the law says you NEED to live on. Neat trick, huh.

Hampton's are not part of Lowell's, they are a "trading style" of Lowell's, which means probably the guy sitting in the desk opposite the 1st guy, possibly even the same guy with different notepaper! I would file very carefully in my recycling bin (paper).