Fair enough

Then why didn't you just reply with that in one of the various emails I sent this morning?

That's very kind of you but there is no need. I want to quit this site and I have been emailing because I don't know how to do it but no-one answers?

Who are you? The thought police or something? If you have so much spare time on your hands why don't you do something more productive like voluntary work in your community rather than nit picking in cyber land. BTW, we are all called 'dear' in the bear garden, why don't read the sub text of the title of the forum? Or are you going to now whinge about that to the moderators?:idea: Your Highness!

Oh dear, how awful. Does any food stuff shut you up? Permanently? I'm buying! Lots!

Correct, feel a bit of a silly arse now dear?

Yes, I agree. There is also a difference between having a chortle at the right time and other times being reserved due to sensitive situations. Maybe you should have displayed that on the NI thread started by gyzmo? Have you got a good un about people in debt or losing their homes?

Ooo dear, 4 posts from you on one thread dedicated to me. Do I have a cyber stalker out to get me here?

And just how is it that you have immunity from starting a thread that is designed to insult, offend and berate another reader of this site that is against all forum rules and get away with it? Pathetic.

Oh c'mon, we know this dish was served like this because some chap says it was, that's all! Does it happen every journey? Not that I know of. Did it happen once? Maybe. Will it happen again? Who knows? Mishaps and accidents happen, so what? If I paid for a service and every time I received an awful response then I'd be angry, if it happened once I'd probably be annoyed but recognise these things happen. Was the guy given back a fiver or whatever? Did Virgin apologise? Seems like the chap is a bit of a jumped up squirt and should realise that some people in the world would be grateful to receive the peas he flicked off his pudding as it may be all they will eat for that day. Good grief, what is wrong with the man?:-|

No skonk, you need to register the job trial first with DWP otherwise its considered just walking away from a job. The lad will have no problems as it is quite clear the employer were shysters and he's never been on benefit before-hardly the action of a scrounger or lazy get.

Oh dear, I apologise Martin and to pat, it was a slip without thinking and I shouldn't have posted that. I'm sorry and meant no offence. Am I now barred?

Sorry conniff, you may not like this- I did what #1 says and I've had trouble ever since! I keep getting my screen freezing up with the message 'programme not responding' about every hour of use. I then click through when able and put through to windows who say it is 'caused by them!' I used to have this before but only rarely, now it is about 3 or 4 times a day. What have I done wrong? I followed exactly what to do. And I've not noticed any quicker surfing-just hassle!!!

Pardon? If you are self employed you are not working for an employer, you are working for yourself or a contractor. The DWP doesn't compel you to work self employed so the lad has only to say he didn't realise this as he felt misled into this job and it only lasted a day so he quit. No problems.

Tell me this edited why did the Information Commissioners Office tell me that they were unable to help with my complaint as the Subject Access Request was made in relation to the consumer credit act as a civil action? And that the IOC would not subsequently involve themselves in a civil complaint in any case? And how did the county court take it upon themselves to force compliance on an issue that was essentially a criminal matter at that time as you yourself suggest? What my post highlighted was the fact a sar was just ignored by a financial institution, the civil court just basically said 'so what, heres another 7 days' and any complaint to IOC is a case of 'nothing to do with us, leave it to a civil court!! That period of non-compliance was ignored by all and was certainly not viewed as a criminal offence!

Oh dear, The Telegraph, need one say anymore?

No sane person would serve a desert with a tomato would they. Why not? A tomato is a fruit, scientifically, and is it not fruits that are mainly used in puddings? Maybe we should ask 'no sane person would serve a berry (a fruit) with a steak,' only to realise that, erm, yes they do. Ever heard of 'sweet tomato?' Often used as a substitute for applesauce, orange, jam etc in poorer countries. Also, the taste of one ingredient can be reduced by the introduction of another, or vice versa, so to completly ignore one food stuff is pretty stupid regardless of what dish is being served. I reckon the guy sounds like a 17 year old toff that needs a good slap.

Yes, I want to know about this hardship ballhooks too. 1 I've no intention of complaining to the FSA as they are useless. Can I start a court claim and ask that the case be heard due to hardship? 2 And if I am in hardship now, 2009, but I want to sue for charges from 2003, does hardship count at all considering bank charges from 2003 cannot really be considered as having an effect in 2009? However, for example, that money of say £2000 from 2003 deprived of me by my bank would now settle my mortgage arrears of £2000 in 2009 if the Goddam claim was heard now?? :confused:

I feel the agony of human loss during The Troubles far outweighs a dispute about an amount of monies paid to either side considering peace has been achieved in such a troubled land. And £12,000 is an amount considered a reflection of loss, not the price of a life on either side. This tactic has been used before and it encourages ALL to recognise that ALL life is sacred, even your enemy, and has been highly effective. I'd much prefer this money to reconcile a land for eternal peace than put it toward some fatcat bank that's for sure.

Yes, but may I put to you the example I have previously given. If an individual steals one mars bar and is convicted as doing so, it is theft and described as such. However, if an individual steals 200 mars bars in a carrier bag and is convicted then that too is theft and described as such. Both are theft but with probably differing convictions, which is why the crb include the sentence. The one individual may be able to explain at an interview that he forgot to pay for a mars bar in all honesty but was still convicted for theft, The other who stole 200 may argue the same point, but is it believable? It is not for the crb to explain anything other than what conviction is recorded, theft is theft and benefit fraud is the same as not declaring savings or not informing of changes of circumstances. It is for employers to use judgment, is a 40 year old drink driver convicted at age 19 on a technicality more of a risk than a 40 year old who has just got his licence back after being 4 times over the limit a year ago? Both are described as drink drivers. Is a woman who was battered every night of her life by her husband before killing him worse than a woman who stabbed her husband to death just to go off and live with her younger lover? A crb will just disclose the same, murder (assuming the battered wife didn't succeed with a manslaughter plea-which happens).

Yes, I'd like to echo Martin's musings here too, good luck for the future after such a torrid period recently.

Pretty poor post here, the reader wants some accurate advice.

On this very subject, I explained to a judge at a county court at a preliminary hearing that the other side had not complied with a sar by 4 months and he just said to them, 'Will 3 weeks from now be enough to send to him (me)?' and that was it! They said ok. What a load of rubbish the law.

Do you have the job advert bandana? Does it say self employed on it? You're not obliged to seek self employed work by the DWP. Plus you were only there a day so just say it was a misunderstanding and you thought it was employed. Also mention in the fact you were doing things other than what the job was described as. I can't see a problem otherwise.

Hi silverbird Are you sure it is eczema and not something else? Only I think eczema is on a more frequent cycle than to have no flare ups in 20 years-I get it on a 7 year cycle. And I don't think there is any legislation for employees working in heat but there is if it is cold. Good luck.