There have been some developments which relate to both the above answers. Rather than try to address each point, I'll just run through it chronologically as I'm sure the relevant points will be obvious.

The cheque which was supposed to have been posted on Monday did not arrive. I informed the seller of this and told them that if the funds were not in my account by close of business tomorrow (Thursday) I would be taking legal steps to recover the money as I felt I was left with no alternative. I gave them my bank details again to make a direct transfer which I am certain is possible over the phone with any UK current account.

I called eBay/PayPal and asked for the seller's address in order to prepare legal recovery via MCOL. They refused to give it. I protested that the seller had my address, why shouldn't I have theirs? I explained that they had issued two refunds via PayPal both of which had ultimately been refused by their bank. I was told that I should report the issue to my local police station. I told them that there was no way that my local police are going to waste time even raising paperwork on something like this. I stated that if they did not give me the seller's address I would include in my claim that eBay had been unco-operative.

I was then referred to another 'resolution specialist' who told me that she was going to make a decision there and then on the case and that she had decided in my favour. I was assured that the money would be credited to my account within 24 hours - however, I have had no e-mail confirmation of this. I had been told on Friday that a decision would be made within 48 hours but was told on Monday that more time was needed.

The seller contacted me to offer to send another cheque but I have not responded.

The seller has a feedback score of 14 and no neutral or negative feedback (yet!).

I always use the UK site. I won't go into details but I'm pretty net savvy. I've been on eBay since 2001 and I have scripts I use to search eBay's UK site exclusively.

No cheque arrived. I have just sent a message that I am taking this very seriously and will be taking legal steps.

Do I need the seller's address to use MCOL? When I asked for their contact details from eBay/PayPal, all I got was their phone number and e-mail address.

When you say, 'confirm', do you mean, am I sure or have I got proof?

I know it was the 18th for sure because I sent the seller a message via eBay within about 30 minutes.

But there was no paperwork other than the scrap of plain paper which the courier had me sign and then scribbled out my signature and wrote that I'd refused to accept it.

Anyway, as an update, the seller has contacted me and said he is sending a cheque. I only hope it clears quickly so that I can put this fiasco behind me.

Yes, I've sent my bank details and will wait to see if there is a response by, say, Tuesday then I will go into ICBM mode.

Thanks for that, I'll keep it up my sleeve. It took me a while to figure out what LBA and MCOL meant.

I actually think the seller is just inexperienced because they tried to save money shipping the item through work but they said it cost them almost £35 (even though they only charged me £5) when I sent mine it cost £4.99.

I think it is a series of cock-ups rather than somebody trying to rip me off; the seller themselves, the courier, the seller's bank and then eBay/PayPal just come in at the end to add their final topping of manure.

I know it makes no sense to appeal here but the seller has had my money for four weeks and I really need it right now to pay a bill from somebody who is breathing down my neck.

Oh, and the courier who lost the package and who use scraps of plain paper as delivery documents is Night Freight.

Well, I appreciate that but is there nothing I can do?

The seller has the item and my money.

Incidentally, it didn't help that the people I spoke to on the phone did not really understand what I was saying.

I bought an item (item A) via eBay auction on 2nd September 2012 to upgrade one I already owned (item B which I was selling also by eBay auction to end on 9th September).

The seller informed me that item A had been sent on 3rd September by 24 hour courier and should arrive on 4th or 5th September at the latest. By 6th September item A had not arrived.The seller contacted courier who said that it was at a depot about 30 miles away but when I phoned the depot, they informed me both by phone and e-mail that there was no record of the consignment nor any deliveries due for my address.

On 9th September, the auction for my item B (which I was upgrading) ended and I shipped it on 10th September and was then without something I had been using daily up until that point. On 13th September, the seller agreed to refund me on the basis that item A appeared to have been lost and attempted to do so but needed to confirm their PayPal account and asked me to wait until they had received their confirmation deposits. This he had to do twice for some reason.

Being assured that I was being refunded and in need of the item I placed a bid on and won another (item C) via eBay to replace mine (item B) as the one I had bought (item A) seemed by all accounts to be lost. The second item (item C) arrived on 15th September. As a safeguard because the seller's PayPal difficulties seemed a bit odd and because I did not want to end up with two items, I opened a case.

On 17th September, after several attempts the seller issued a refund by PayPal which had a note on it stating that it was pending until 21st September. On 18th September (15 days after item A was sent - supposedly by 24 hour delivery), a courier arrived with a package which he asked me to sign for on a wrinkled scrap of plain paper which I did as I had been expecting another delivery. When I saw the box, I realised that it was the first item (item A) I bought which was believed lost. I informed the courier that the item should be returned. He said that reason it had not been delivered was that the paperwork had been lost.

I informed the seller who was relieved that the item (item A) was being returned to them. They then told me that as they had sent it using a courier through their employer that they wanted me to deny any knowledge of the delivery should their employer phone. This didn't happen but I agreed to it anyway.

On 21st September, instead of the payment clearing, the note said, 'Returned'. I spoke to PayPal who told me that this was because the seller's bank refused to release funds. When I informed seller, another refund was issued which said pending until 28th September but today, 28th September this payment has also been returned.

I phoned PayPal who referred me to eBay and was told that if I escalated my case (which I have done) they would find against me because the item had arrived even though I had not accepted it despite the fact that the seller is on record as offering me a refund and that the refund has been initiated twice and that the item had been returned to them.

I am now £105 down. But what I find additionally frustrating is that if I buy using PayPal, the money is taken from my account the next day whereas if I am being issued a refund it takes a week.

But this cannot be right, surely?!

I'm not sure if this is the right section but I can't see a more appropriate one so forgive me if it is the wrong place.

I'm writing this in the first person for simplicity but it applies to somebody else.

I live in a rural area of Scotland (I only mention this because the laws may be different) and recently my landlord has started using a bird scarer. It starts as soon as it gets light (currently 5.00am) and goes on until dusk. It's located about 400m from my house.

It makes a noise like heavy artillery fire - about ten times as loud as a shotgun and it is really disturbing for me and my animals as well as my neighbour who actually lives almost right next to it. It seems very inconsiderate of my landlord - I have lived here for ten years and this is the first time that a bird scarer this noisy has been used anywhere near my house.

I am worried about complaining because I don't want to jeopardise my tenancy.

What can I do?

Thank you.

I had written up a fuller account bus I said, I tried to PM it to you but there is no link for me to send it to you. Putting more information in the public domain could only make matters worse.

No, I cannot say more in a public forum.

I tried to PM you with further details but could not find a link to do so.

Demand for websites etc.? You would think so, eh!

I used to have my own business before I moved but had been off sick for two years following a botched operation and a month in intensive care - I was hardly able to walk for almost a year and my digestive system still causes me serious problems. My business died as a result. I was actually due to start a very lucrative filmmaking job but was physically unable to do it and it went to somebody else.

Once I felt able to do some work, I volunteered for a while and then got a job driving kids with special needs to school. It wasn't great pay but I loved it - I really enjoyed working with them. Then the fuel prices went up and the company lost the contract. Some time afterwards, I was seeing somebody in Scotland and started volunteering on an informal basis at their place of work - a rural community for adults with learning difficulties. When it arose, I applied for a job there as a workshop leader. I didn't get it - though, I am told it was very close - and a few months later they approached me to offer me a job in more of a support position. I explained that it was not my usual line of work but they said that after a couple of months I would have another part time role doing something more appropriate to my skills.

To cut a long story short, I moved 250 miles for the job, spent all my salary on furnishing, fitting out and refurbishing an unfurnished cottage in a remote area on the edge of the Highlands. They did not keep their promises and when they employed somebody new to work alongside me who had polar opposite ways/thoughts/ideas, it became increasingly impossible. I felt betrayed and unsupported - the stress took its toll on my digestive system and led me to the brink of suicide.

The nearest (very small) town is about 10 miles away. There is hardly any employment in my usual creative fields and I am completely unqualified as a support worker. I am applying for anything for which I think I am capable - but it feels like I would be as well posting my applications in the local paper recycling skip (metaphorically - most are online). I am in my fifties and I am certain that that is an unconscious factor when employers look at my application. I am also certain that at least one employer discriminated against me because of my gender.

I never miss an opportunity to tell people I meet what my skills are in case they might have or know of something I could do but I am not a natural salesperson - I am probably a bit annoying for them.

I am not so down about the lack of an occupation - I am very resourceful and practical and there is plenty to do to keep myself busy (and keep the bills down). I struggle a bit money wise but have learned to be frugal. What I find hard to cope with is the intense pressure from the Job Centre and the lack of understanding of the situation I have found myself in. And to be perfectly frank, if I was forced into a job which did not stimulate me and provide at least some outlet for my creativity, I'd rather take a one way trip to a Swiss clinic.

Having been through an Employment Tribunal for constructive dismissal recently, it cannot be stressed enough how important it is to have everything documented. Had I not kept every single e-mail and text message I would have been up the creek, really.

I also was able to get copies of minutes of meetings and a photocopy of my work diary before I left which were also extremely helpful in proving my case.

But where I did not do so well (because my employer had a self-manufactured ethical reputation) was in trusting the employer from the outset, not getting their promises in writing, having informal chats with my manager when I should have been having formal meetings with somebody taking minutes and not following the correct grievance procedure because they led me down a parallel path which was not recognised my the tribunal as official.

Make sure you have such evidence before you resign because you will not get much co-operation from your employer afterwards - it took two months to get a copy of one document as I was being pestered by their solicitor to explain the relevance without actually giving too much away.

I was also taken to task by the respondent's solicitor for not having a support person at some meetings. You ought to be able to have anybody you choose with you, as far as I know.

Hello P1964,

Yes, I am about to be referred to the Back to Work programme. I have been told that I now have to start looking for work up to 90 minutes travelling time away, i.e. three hours per day. I did a back-of-an-envelope calculation and worked out that if I were to take a 40 hours per week job that far away paying national minimum wage, I would net about £50 per week after tax before I even started thinking about paying my rent (£95), food or bills.

I had my first proper interview just over a week ago at a company providing services to British people about to get married. It was advertised as a Proof Reader - though it turned out they actually wanted a Copy Writer. The salary was advertised as £1400 per month. Yet at the interview, the owner/manager said the pay would be national minimum wage, a considerable difference and a pretty paltry reward for a job requiring a pretty high level of proficiency. When asked if I had any questions, I asked if their might be any openings for my graphic design, web design or filmmaking skills and was told that all that kind of work was done in India. Apart from the eventual dawning that my line of work had finally gone the way of so many industries, I realised that this company was acting as a funnel for money to leave the country and that the only people they employed were a handful of people whose knowledge of the English language was essential to the selling of their services - everybody else was abroad.

To be honest, I am feeling pretty despondent about my situation. I actually feel that I should cut back on the amount of time I spend looking for work and spend more time doing something practical that I enjoy as a kind of work substitute but the pressure I am under from the Job Centre is overwhelming. I moved to my present location simply to take the job I was offered which led to the tribunal. Moving is not an option for several reasons but I am so remote from the majority of jobs that living here without a job is very difficult. At least the summer months are more bearable.

I have posted about my own employment problems elsewhere on this forum but somebody who works at the place I used to work is having similar problems except that they have a far more serious nature, go back several years and involve a level of confidentiality which prevents details being posted anywhere in the public domain. In fact a small part of the problem is that some confidential details have already appeared where they shouldn't.

Being familiar with almost all the details, I know that this person is being treated in the most appalling way and the employer is piling pressure on them when they should, according to the word of the industry guidelines, be supporting them.

In my case, I went to the CAB and then a solicitor. With the greatest respect to the CAB, I think they do a great job, I think that they were a little bit out of their depth with it and my solicitor seems to have let me down very badly. My friend is not in a position to afford a solicitor.

Can anybody help, please?

It's now over two months since I accepted the offer and there seems to be no progress at all - literally nothing!

I have contacted my solicitor a number of times but he simply says he will be in touch.

I have started to wonder if there might be a limited period in which I might possibly make a complaint about my solicitor and that he is trying to run it out. Can anybody advise me on this, please?

I am here, sort of. I was dealing with a computer issue for my girlfriend and had to prioritise.

Incidentally, I am male but I am flattered that it was not obvious from my writing.

The issue of Legal Aid clawback was the topic or subtopic in another thread regarding my Employment Tribunal and it is currently a stalled ongoing situation. My solicitor has told me that he was aware of the clawback rule introduction (last April, I think) but had not thought it had been implemented at the time I started my Employment Tribunal action.

My solicitor admitted to me on the phone that it he had 'ballsed up' and that there was a possibility of appealing against the clawback on the grounds that it would cause hardship on my part. As one of the main strands of my Employment Tribunal claim which, on the face of it, appears to have been successful (in that I was made a settlement offer by my employer after having heard four days of evidence) was based on the resultant financial hardship it ought to follow that the appeal against the clawback ought to be a formality but my solicitor does not seem to think so.

In any case, I am waiting for the outcome of that before I do anything. As far as I know, despite the Employment Tribunal settlement being agreed over two months ago, there has been no formal acceptance - at least I have not signed anything. I have tried to contact my solicitor to get updates but he simply says that he will be in touch when the time comes.

I feel that I ought to state that it had not been my intention to use a solicitor - I made an appointment simply to get an assessment of my case - I knew that successful constructive dismissal cases were rare. I normally fight my own battles and in the last three years have fought eON, Equity Insurance Group, O2 and Scottish Hydro at length and won in each case. It was only because the solicitor made such a compelling case for his services that I decided to engage him on the terms he laid out, i.e. with no mention of clawback. Indeed, he brought to my attention a couple of times that he needed to make representation to the Legal Aid Board that there was a justifiable case for renewing the funds as the case progressed. And when the employer made an offer which was half of what I eventually accepted, he advised me that it was 'generous', which could only be interpreted as a suggestion to take it. Had I done so, I would have been no worse off than I am now. In fact, had I not even pursued the case I would have been no worse off than I am now. I had been off sick with stress and would have been better off staying sick rather than resigning and insisting that my employer address the situation before I returned to work - but I was in too much of a rush to get back to work and as a result had a 'meltdown' and subsequently resigned.

Bottom line, though, I have only had three dealings with solicitors and they have all been bad experiences. I have also learned that whilst lawyers are happy to fight each other whilst representing clients, they don't like to act against each other, so whichever way this goes, I will not be engaging a solicitor to represent me.

Thanks Conniff, I figured that.

My point in the first instance may not have been clear. The council advertise jobs on their website - some, it states, are only open to internal applications and some are open to everybody. It is impossible to apply for the vacancies for internal applicants only as there is a series of questions preceding the application, the first of which is, 'Do you work for XXX Council?'. If you answer 'no' you cannot proceed.

It's annoying enough that the council advertises jobs for all to see which are not open to external applicants rather than, say, having them only visible to council employees who are logged on.

So, I have only applied for jobs which are open to everybody. I have not applied for any job for which I do not have relevant experience - in fact this is usually another filter question - and (as I stated clearly) I have applied for two jobs for which I met every criterion - in spades.

If the council are not recruiting anybody from outside when they are advertising jobs as being open to applications from anybody, there is something wrong (they are operating a quasi-closed shop which, I believe is not legal). And as stated I have not even had an interview for two positions which I meet ALL stipulated criteria. In fact, in one instance they said they required at least five years experience in a certain field and I have almost twenty.

Becky, I am sure you only want to be helpful but from your answers, I would hazard a guess that you have never experienced a protracted period of unemployment whilst trying to support yourself on benefits - let alone living in an isolated area and under pressure from all directions. I have just endured nine months of an Employment Tribunal having moved to my present location from 250 miles away to take a job which failed to meet any of the promises made when it was offered to me and I was left untrained in a position which should have been occupied by two people. I am bound by legal confidentiality but the employer made a financial settlement after nine months of torture only for my solicitor to then tell me that he had forgotten to inform me before I engaged his services that my Legal Aid had a clawback clause and I would not receive a penny.

For your information, I had seen my GP because of the issues I was facing at work and the subsequent tribunal and he provided a statement which was used in evidence. But it was clear from that statement that he had not really taken any notice of what I had told him and instead made inference from memory and/or notes (I had a copy of his notes and they bore little resemblance to his statement).

Having fought a legal battle whilst trying to find work for twelve months, I now find myself under additional pressure from the Job Centre and have to attend extra meetings with a company who specialise in forcing square pegs into round holes. It won't be long before my car tax, MOT and insurance run out which will leave me ten miles from the nearest urban area without transport. My rent has just gone up by £6.00 per week taking it to £18 per week more than my Housing Benefit. I have just sold an item of equipment vital to my line of work in order to keep my head above water - something which even a court cannot force you to do). I have kept warm this last winter mainly by scavenging wood from trees which fell in last December's storms.

I don't normally make use of the maxim in reference to myself but never judge a man until you have walked a mile in his moccasins. I feel no embarrassment saying this because my profile is quite anonymous but I am generally somebody who stands up for the vulnerable.

If we accept the status quo, nothing changes. Some people, I am guessing, who have posted in this thread would not even be permitted to vote had the law not been challenged - not that I believe that voting realistically changes anything.

When I was a child, I was probably quite precocious and before I even started school I was repeating most things I heard including television adverts (many of which I still remember 47 years later). This annoyed my Dad so much that he taught me Shakespeare and my Mum often recounts how I cause widespread jaw dropping in the waiting room of the clinic as I was waiting for an inoculation by reciting the soliloquy from Hamlet. I think it is worth quoting:

To be, or not to be: that is the question:

Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer

The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,

Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,

And by opposing end them? To die: to sleep;

No more; and by a sleep to say we end

The heart-ache and the thousand natural shocks

That flesh is heir to, 'tis a consummation

Devoutly to be wish'd. To die, to sleep;

To sleep: perchance to dream: ay, there's the rub;

For in that sleep of death what dreams may come

When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,

Must give us pause: there's the respect

That makes calamity of so long life;

For who would bear the whips and scorns of time,

The oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely,

The pangs of despised love, the law's delay,

The insolence of office and the spurns

That patient merit of the unworthy takes,

When he himself might his quietus make

With a bare bodkin? who would fardels bear,

To grunt and sweat under a weary life,

But that the dread of something after death,

The undiscover'd country from whose bourn

No traveller returns, puzzles the will

And makes us rather bear those ills we have

Than fly to others that we know not of?

Thus conscience does make cowards of us all;

And thus the native hue of resolution

Is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought,

And enterprises of great pith and moment

With this regard their currents turn awry,

And lose the name of action. - Soft you now!

The fair Ophelia! Nymph, in thy orisons

Be all my sins remember'd.

I consider the matter of my original post closed.

I wish I'd never asked.

Well, maybe they are acting within the law but advertising vacancies as being open to non-council employees when in fact they have no intention of recruiting non-employees does not sound very ethical to me. It is frustrating enough that they advertise vacancies on their site which, when clicked on, are NOT open to non-council employees.

And please don't take this the wrong way but when you spend half your waking day looking at the same limited vacancies, have exhausted your speculative approach option (even though you know that they are a nuisance for employers to deal with) and you are under pressure from the Job Centre to apply for a quota of jobs each week, are feeling close to cracking up with the combination of boredom, financial pressure and sense of purposelessness, anxiety and depression, practical advice to invest time and energy into finding an actual job is the sort of thing that might trigger a psychotic episode.

I lost my job about a year ago (the details are not relevant but see my other threads if you would like to know more) and have been looking for work ever since.

I have applied for about a hundred jobs in the last twelve months - that might not sound a lot but I live in the middle of nowhere and there really isn't much on offer.

About half the jobs I have applied for have been with the local council and through their website.

There have been at least ten of those jobs which I felt suitable and two which I fulfilled every stated requirement in terms of quite specific experience yet I have not had a single interview.

I initially felt that I had been discriminated against because of my age but wondered how on earth that could be proven. Then I started to wonder if the council ever recruited people who were not already employed by them. It was only when I mentioned this to people who may know, e.g. my adviser at the Job Centre and others who know the area well (I have only lived here for two years) that I started to hear the same story, that it is very difficult to get a job with the council unless you are already working there or have a relative who works there.

Ironically, one of the questions asked on their site when applying for jobs is about whether or not you have relatives working for them.

I am minded to submit an FOI request to find out what percentage of positions are awarded to non-employees.

The more I think about it the more annoyed I get and it occurred to me that in fact they are all the employees of the council tax payers and there should not be any preference given to current employees.

If it wasn't for the requirement for me to apply for a quota of jobs every week, I would not bother but it really feels like I am banging my head agains the wall and the more effort I put into my applications the more it hurts! I spent several days on a recent application trying to get everything perfectly worded and measured.

Can anybody advise me either on the FOI aspect or the law in terms of the preference of current employees in recruitment, please?

Thank you for the comprehensive guide.

The practical stuff is interesting but unfortunately the bureaucracy conflicts so much with the philosophy behind the plan, i.e. to live outside the matrix, that I can't realistically see it happening. At least until the SHTF and all the DEFRA officials have more pressing things to occupy themselves.

Maybe they will threaten to detain you under Section 2 of the Mental Health Act 1983. Clearly, anybody who does not watch television is mentally ill and needs locking up for their own protection as per Soviet Russia.

It just occurred to me how similar this is to the ubiquitous ownership of cars in America, the lack of footpaths and the crime of jaywalking.

Can I ask a stupid question?

Have they completely shut down analogue television broadcasts? I only ask because I do have a high end VHS VCR which I use for video transfers of old material - I sometimes edit video in my spare time. I'm aware that the VCR has a TV tuner in it but it is not and has never been connected to the aerial - it's actually in the opposite corner of the room to the aerial socket. I ask just in case they do accept my invitation to call round and find it. But in some ways, it would make an interesting court hearing if they were forced to concede that owning a VCR with a built in analogue receiver would not enable anybody to watch or record television programmes.