Hello Everyone. The day has finally arrived. I had three letters from Debt Recovery Plus Ltd (DRP) 29/08/18, 12/09/17 and 27/09/17, then a letter from Gladstonr Solicitors on 24/10/17. Ive now received a letter yesterday, dated 21/06/18, from Gladstone Solicitors headed "Letter before claim" I love the line that reads "We refer you to paragraph 2.1© of the PAP which obliges the parties to act reasonably and proportionately" So could you advise on what I need to do now please. Just in case, PAP = Pre Action Protocol Thanks Phillip Ive drafted a possible reply to Gladstones: I have received your letter dated 28/06/18 and I am responding as the registered keeper of this vehicle. You appear to be unaware that CPM UK Car Park Management have not met the requirements of the POFA 2012 Schedule 4 within the 'Notice' they sent to me. Without the POFA, they cannot hold me liable for a private parking charge, as registered keeper. There was no lawful reason for me to respond to their claim, but a letter was sent on 16 May 2017 on Recorded Letter ref KF709831486GB stating that they had no claim. Your client has no cause of action. Under the provisions of the POFA 2012 Schedule 4, the notice to keeper must be delivered not later than 14 days after the date that the vehicle was parked. A notice sent by post under the act, is presumed to have been delivered on the second working day after which it was posted. For the purpose of the act working days mean any day other than a Saturday, Sunday or Bank Holiday. The requirements of the POFA 2012 Schedule 4 have not been met by CPM UK Car Park Management, therefore I cannot be held liable for the parking charge as the registered keeper. I presume reading your letter before claim; you have not had sight of the documents provided to me by CPM UK Car Park Management, as you would be aware that the notice to keeper was not delivered within the relevant timeframe. The driver has not been identified and I am prepared to sign a witness statement confirming this as a true fact. I am under no obligation to name the driver, nor can the old irrelevant 'Elliot v Loake' apply. So, I wish to know on what basis your client is trying to hold me liable. Your client has failed to meet the requirements of The Protection of Freedoms Act to pursue me as keeper so it seems to me; they have no cause of action in any case. I look forward to your response shortly. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Would the above letter be the thing to send ? Thanks Phillip

Sounds like fun ! I will definately keep you all posted. Thanks for the wonderful advice, just needed someone else to help sort my mind out. had a thought that Id already sent letter saying "Out of time, get stuffed" which would stand up if it went any further. had a daft idea that not replying afterwards would do more damage than doing nothing. my take on this is that as it took them 21 days to get the NTK letter on my door mat, and as they even supplied all the dates in their claim to back up my info, then if it gets as far as legal action, then they have shot themselves in their little foot. thank you to you both for getting back to me.

Hello Guys. I sent off my letter to CPM as the registered keeper, saying that as CPM had not sent their letter within the time, they had no claim against the registerd keeper. I received a letter back from them saying nothing about anything in my letter, nothing about Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4, nothing about they would cancel the alleged debt because they screwed up, nothing except the next stage of appeal. I ignored their advice on who to appeal to next as this would be an admission by me that I am accepting their invoice and I am willing to pay it. Ive now received a letter from them titled "Formal Demand". Ive started trying to get some sort of reply together and wondered if you could give your advice. The basics so far is : Your claim and invoice are invalid and unenforceable based on the following Your “Parking Charge Notice” had not been served within the time limits specified by the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4. The Keeper therefore cannot be held liable. (4)The notice must be given by— (a)handing it to the keeper, or leaving it at a current address for service for the keeper, within the relevant period; or (b)sending it by post to a current address for service for the keeper so that it is delivered to that address within the relevant period. (5)The relevant period for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4) is the period of 14 days beginning with the day after that on which the specified period of parking ended. I have now received another letter from your company stating “Formal Demand”. I now consider your communications as harassment and request that you cancel your illegal invoice, and reframe from making any more threats or fraudulent claims for monies. Do not send debt collector letters and do not add any costs, which would be a thinly-veiled attempt at 'double recovery'. I will not respond to debt collectors and to involve a third party would be a failure to mitigate your costs as well as deliberate and knowing misuse of my data. Your aggressive business practice and unwarranted threat of further action for the ordinary matter of a driver using my car without causing any obstruction nor offence, has caused significant distress to me. I do not give you consent to process data relating to me or this vehicle. I deny liability for any sum at all and you must consider this letter a Section 10 Notice under the DPA. You are required to respond within 21 days. I have kept proof of submission of this appeal and look forward to your reply. Oh. And they even had the bare faced cheek to expect me to supply details of who was driving the car at the time, if it wasnt me.

Hello Guys. Just an update for you all. I will try to keep this short. My partner is now on ESA, and I am the working side. We had the medical which I said I wanted to record, they refused, sanctioned us, had to appeal, tribunal, we won, I had a big bust up with my job centre, told them where to go fly of and quit harassing my partner, got banned and had to go to the nearest town for three months, easy. Had a interview at my local JCP behind glass, the woman started, I was literary shouting, screaming, swearing, telling her to quit her verbal and get on with it, she was visibly shaking. Had a letter after 6 months re me having app in my JCP. I wrote back saying I wanted to go to the nearest town office as I didnt like my own JCP, and that they were going to kick off and I would bite and get loud, and that amounts to no help at all. They called and spoke to my partner saying they couldnt send me to the other office as they didnt have the staff, thankfully she was switched on and replied "The unemployment figures have gone down for our county, so less claimants so should be less work, plus you had the staff when you banned him for 3 months.". Silence....... OK well as everything is OK we will leave it at that, thanks for your time. We haven't heard from them for over two years. Bliss The morale of the story is that you need to search forums like this one, plus the whatdotheyknow (which has given me fantastic ammo), and then be confident enough to go and take no prisoners. You have to be so switched on as they throw stuff at you all the time so quickly. I love it, I always signed on before my partner, so pre warned her of what was going to happen. Ive had them try their bull and Ive thrown it back at them, accused them of lieing in front of other claimants. Hence why they targeted my partner. Shes not stupid, very smart, but not as quick as me, and she would rather take an easy life than kick off. So Im glad for all the help you have all given, been wonderfull.

Thank you for this. Ive just emailed DVLA asking for a SAR to get the info. My photos showed that the signs did say about permits being needed. But the line im using for that is : "I am writing with regards to your speculative invoice dated 16/05/2017. I am challenging this “parking charge” as the Registered keeper on the following grounds. On the 20th May 2017, as the registered keeper of the vehicle I received your Notice to Keeper ref 3......dated 16th may 2017. This notice refers to a parking event on 29th April 2017, and has therefore not been served within the time limits specified by the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4. The Keeper therefore cannot be held liable. Furthermore I understand that signage and layout at the car park is such that the driver was not made sufficiently aware that a permit was required in the particular area where (s)he parked. I understand that the driver would defend any claim on this and other grounds." Once DVLA get back to me the fun begins

Hello Everyone. I visited a friend on 29/04/17 in the early evening. Today, 20/05/17 I received a letter from CPM UK Car Park Management that a PCN was issued on 16/05/17 in relation to my visit on 29/04/17. An operative did not attend to see the apparent parking, a tennant at the flats takes photos of cars, sends them to CPM who then issue PCN's The area is split into two parking areas, one on the left, one on the right, with main entry driveway down the middle. I have attached 11 photos for you to look at. The block of flats is owned by a social housing association that has its head office in Newbury, West Berkshire. As you can see from the photos there is : 1 - no mention of permits being needed on any of the signs, 2 - only a couple of the bays have numbers which I think relates to flat number 3 - there are no designated visitor parking bays 4 - even though its private land, surely visitors are allowed to drive to the site and park up to visit a tennant. CPM001 - Location of Parking sign nearest to where my car was parked CPM002 - Close up picture of the sign CPM003 - The bay my car was parked in when receiving the PCN CPM004 - A parking bay with a designated flat number CPM005 - Majority of the bays do not have designated flat numbers, or visitor parking signs CPM006 - Sign on entry stating it is private parking CPM007 - Parking sign in right hand side car park CPM008 - Cars parked in bays with no designated flat numbers, or visitor parking CPM009 - Vehicles park on the main entry road / pavement CPM010 - Vehicles park on the main entry road / pavement CPM011 - Vehicles park on the main entry road / pavement I read that as its private land, then the PCN is actually an invoice (contract law), and that by appealing you are agreeing that the invoice is valid. I have also emailed DVLA today to see if CPM are legally allowed to get driver vehicle details from DVLA. But Im bothered by the fact that the "Offence" took place on 29/04, The offence wasnt recorded at CPM for 17 days, and then it took fours days for the letter to arrive. I wanted to know if there is a nice letter to send, which doesnt accept liability, but tells CPM they're talking rubbish and Im not paying. Sorry trying to upload photos, whats the spec needed ? Thanks Phillip

Hi fkofilee. I do have another bank account. But moving banks isnt the issue. The issue is Yorkshire acting like they can do what they want regardless, and basically dumping the brown stuff on people with no recourse. Sorry to sound like im being rude, im not.

Hi Everyone. Ive been having problems with Yorkshire Bank taking money from my JSA for bank charges etc. Whats happened is due to being sanctioned or bank holiday late payment from DWP, my DD's didnt get paid. So Yorkshire Bank charged me for this which put me overdrawn, then then charged me for unauthorised overdraft fee. I asked them, using the social security act, if I could get a refund, they refused. I then used the first right of appropriation, which Yorkshire Bank stated was complete rubbish and didnt apply. So I took it to the Financial Ombudsman Service, and have been told that, basically, the bank can do what they want, and me being on JSA dont mean squat. The FOS reply was : "I note you say that the charges applied have been deducted from your benefit income. I should explain that a deduction of charges from benefit payments does not contravene key statues, such as the Social Security Act 1992. In respect of this I should explain that, unfortunately, there is a misunderstanding here as to the meaning of the wording of the Social Security Act 1992 when it refers to a 'charge' on benefit payments. Essentially, any reference to 'charges' in the relevant legislation means a 'lien' on the benefits - it makes it an offence to offer (or accept) a benefits entitlement as security. It does not mean that a bank cannot levy charges on an account if benefit payments are paid into it. As such, my opinion on your complaint remains unchanged. As explained in my letter, consumers have the right to ask the ombudsman to review their case – as the final stage in our process." So can I ask, is the above legal, or is there something else I can do ? Thanks Phillip

Hi. Sorry for no posting earlier. Yorkshire bank refused to pay back any bank charges, despite me using the fact that Im on JSA etc, and that my partner was sanctioned for three months. I then used the right of appropriation letter to stop future charges. But I received a real snotty letter from them saying they had spoken to their legal department and that "Right of appropriation" didnt protect my JSA money, and that they were still going to charge me bank charges. So Ive done an online complaint to the financial ombudsman, but I dont hold out any hope regarding how much power they have.

Ive sent a letter of appropriation to see if that helps, otherwise I'll look at BCOBS rules as there is a couple I could look at.

Ive just found this "Once a benefit payment is credited to an account it merges with the existing account balance, whether this is overdrawn or in credit. If the account is overdrawn the bank are fully within their rights to offset the benefit payment against the overdraft and take any charges.". My arguement is that I have no other income going into my bank account. The only money going into the account is my JSA, so does that blow the theory of "merging with existing account balance, and dont know whats jsa or not"

Yep its a standard basic account, no overdraft facilities etc, just a debit / cashpoint card

Yorkshire Bank refusing to consider paying back bank charges despite knowing I am on JSA. Last month, Dec 2014, I should have received JSA on 13th and 27th. With my DD's one goes out on 28th and the other two at the beginning of the month. What I did was I assumed that I would be paid on time on the 27th, normally I am. So when I get paid on 27th I leave the £60 to cover my DD's. The problem is that the DWP didnt pay us untill 6pm on the 30th, which was a one hour payment thing. So to cut a long story short, my DD didnt get paid so Yorkshire Bank charges me, this puts me overdrawn, then then turn round and start charging me for going overdrawn, which they take the next month. I read a post about a Lloyds customer getting unfair charges back and a link to legislation that people on JSA are protected from unfair bank charges (someone correct me here if Im wrong). So I wrote a letter to Yorkshire Bank. I had a letter from them today saying they are refusing to consider paying back any bank charges and that the legislation I quoted means, and I quote their answer here "Your email quotes section 187 of the social security administration act 1992, which you feel should protect those in receipt of benefits from being charged. However, the purpose of this act is to stop benefit money being at risk by it being given or transferred to a third party in payment of a debt. It is not meant to stop bank charges if the money paid into your account comes from benefits or tax credits" Im on a tight budget, so if I lose benefit money through bank charges, because the DWP screwed up, and the next month I get unauthorised overdraft fees then this has the effect that my JSA is less which means I end up in a vicious circle. So could I ask for some advice here of how to proceed ? Thanks Phillip

Started reading this form and already found a lot of inconsistencies about hours. Im going to be putting in a SAR for my partner asking for all the DWP referrals via the PRaP system, and all the CWP DMA 01 forms. See what we can do with that

That was my initial gut feeling. Im glad you have said what I was thinking.

Hi Everyone. Sorry for not responding sooner as Ive been checking paperwork and checking dates / letters received and sent etc. Ive written the following in date order regarding what letters have been received and sent. Hopefully you can advise whether there is anything that looks wrong. Please excuse the fact that I have whaffled on a bit. Ive tried to include specific details without going too much into detail. The dates on the letters we received are when they were typed NOT when they were actually received in the post and would have taken two / three days to arrive, any letters sent from us were sent on the date listed. 20 June 2014 Sanction Enquiry form Re partner refusing to go on to CWP 24 June 2014 Sent letter to Cosham LMDM explaining why partner was refusing to participate in CWP. Part of this was a conscientious objection as she is ill, can only do part time hours, is a carer for her OAP mother who has had cancer twice, and that she believed that JCP should have done a meeting to discuss what she would be doing on the CWP, taking into account her circumstances, not chucking her over to LearnDirect and saying it was LearnDirects responsibility to discuss circumstances and NOT DWP's. We firmly believe that my partner should have had a signed agreement between her JCP advisor and herself about what placement she would be put on when being sent over to LearnDirect. DWP are passing the buck seeing as the evidence all points to the CWP being 30 hours, with an additional 4-10 hours per week job searching. If my partner had signed into this then she would have been a minimum of 18 hours over her part time hours, part time hours which have been stated by her doctor because of her illness. This would then have given the DWP a reason to question my partners fitness to only do part time hours. We also added to this letter the following "I would like to request a current list of organisations who accept CWP claimants so that I can further expand on my Conscientious objections. Without this information I cannot make an informed judgement. Failure to provide this information will only enhance my belief that the DWP are acting illegally, immorally and unprofessionally." 7th and 10th July 2014 Received two identical letters from someone called Dominic Carey. One was handed to partner by her advisor on 7th, unsigned by D Carey. Second one arrived via post on 10th July signed by squiggle. He apparently deals with requests for further information on the "Workfare", and is going to be dealing with my partners conscientious objection. 14 July 2014 Received 4 page letter re change in circumstances. Letter was stating because of partners sanction money was being reduced from 1st July to 28th July 2014. Letter received two weeks into sanction. We have received no letter from DWP explaining on what grounds they were upholding the sanction, and under what legislation / law. I actually believed that my car insurance payment had gone out as it was due, hence we didnt worry about not getting full JSA, I believed that the full amount had gone into my bank and that the DD had been paid. Then we received the "Change of circumstances" letter and thats when I checked my online banking. 18 July 2014 Cosham sent second sanction enquiry form which arrived 21st July. 21st July Sent letter to Cosham saying we want to appeal the sanction, but we require a letter from then stating why they were upholding the sanction. We complained that we hadnt received a letter from them stating this in the first place. 28th July Partnet handed in a JSA28 to the JCP in the morning two hours before her appointment that day. 1st Aug 2014 Two letters arrived for my partner, one regarding the CWP dated 28th July 2014. Second letter is next advisor appointment dated 29th July 2014. The advisor sent a letter in the post about a CWP appointment which had been booked for the 29th July. He would have tried handing this letter to my partner on the 28th July for her to attend the next day. He put the letter in the post knowing it wouldnt arrive untill after the CWP appointment, so we think that the JCP will try and raise another sanction doubt for this. 4th Aug 2014 Sent email to D Carey as we hadnt received a reply from him. 5th Aug 2014. Email from D Carey apologising for the delay and that he was putting a letter in the post that day. Also still waiting for reply from Cosham re specific reasons for upholding sanction. On a lighter note. We sent two letters regarding two JCP staff being in breach of the DPA 1998 and the Equality Act, and that we had a recording to prove it. We had a letter back from a DWP staff member who stated the following "Your narrative of the recollections of the interviews and those of the members of staff concerned differ widely. Where the recollections of two parties to a conversation are irreconcilable and there is no corroborating evidence, the manager has to consider which account is more likely than not to have happened. In making the decision, we cannot ignore the fact that the member of staff is very experienced and that providing a good customer service is very important to them. On balance we found that it was more likely than not that Ms XXX recollection was inaccurate. If you wish to send a copy of this recording (not the transcript) to myself at the above address. I will be happy to listen to this additional evidence and consider its impact on the above conclusion" The original recording post is at http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?426931-Complaint-against-JCP-adviser-recording-the-conversation&p=4556620&posted=1#post4556620

Six weeks ago my partners advisor tried to refer her to the CWP, she refused. This advisor and his pal sat at the desk next to him, both victimised my partner and tried to force her onto the CWP in a dirty underhanded way. We have put in a big complaint under the equality act, and my partner also recorded the one conversation showing she was being ganged up on. You may remember I asked about the recording. The DWP, as yet, havnt answered the complaint. My partner also included a consciencious objection. The CO is being dealth with by a DWP manager in Bracknell. So it looks like the CO isnt even going to be considered as part of the whole complaint. But the problem is that the DWP has now tried to refer my partner three times in six weeks. We have already had one sanction equiry form which we replied to, and had a reply back saying it is being upheld. But today we have received a second sanction equiry form relating to the second time they tried to refer my partner. The first saction upheld letter was dated the 14th July, received 17th which said that the sanction was being enforced for the period of 1st to 28th of July, so we were informed of the sanction two weeks after it started. I have checked my bank account and the payment for 4th July was for the full amount, only the 17th paymeny was hit. So this is a procedurral error (i think). But to explain my question with a dodgy example. I go to Tescos and a staff member offers me a tin of Tescos baked beans, I refuse saying I dont like them, so I receive a sanction. Two weeks later the same staff member tries to offer me the same tin of baked beans, again I refuse so now I get a second sanction. My arguement is that if its the same tin of baked beans (CWP Initial Referal), offered three times over six weeks. Can they actually sanction me multiple times for turning down the same tin of beans (CWP Initial Referal) ? Despite the fact that my partner stated in a six page letter why she wouldnt do the CWP. Surely it must be three completely different tins of baked beans, tescos, heinz and branston, for three sanctions to be imposed ? They have refused to take into account my partners illness, her doctors cert with part time hours, the JSA agreement clearly showing less than 20 hours a week, the fact that she is a carer for her mother which the DWP knows about, the fact that the info for the CWP clearly states 30 hours a week with 4-10 hrs structured jobsearch a week which would put her at least 14 hrs over the part time hours that she is down for doing. We have also looked at the Community Payback info, and it seems that the termanology for the CWP and Community Payback are very similar in what work the person is going to be doing. It seems that offenders and claimants would be working together. My partner also stated that under health and safety she didnt want to be doing work with offenders. We obviously need to appeal the first sanction. But we are concerned about how to deal with the second saction enquiry, as the answer is going to be exactly the same as the first. So we need to gain some good advice about how to proceed. Plus does anyone know why its now called a sanction enquiry form ? Before it was a sanction doubt. If possible can you also advise on legal action, or possibily commercial liens, as the only way to get through theses peoples heads is with legal action against the individuals rather than the DWP as a whole. As Im thinking that there is a big loop called the complaints resolution team, that protects the rest. Thanks Phillip

I totally agree. I have also been getting the Universal Jobmatch job alerts, and they are all Aprentice jobs for about £150 per week. At 47 yrs old with work experience from the age of 16, I find it funny that the UJ emails are sending me aprentice jobs.

Got this about Baliffs, and the same (should hopefully) apply to everyone. "There is only an implied license under English Common Law for people to be able to visit me on my property without express permission; the postman and people asking for directions etc (Armstrong v. Sheppard and Short Ltd [1959] 2 Q.B. per Lord Evershed M.R.). It is case law, so no matter what their intention of their visit it, if they come onto your property without your permission or without you agreeing to any appointment for them to visit you at home, then as far as the law is concerned they are indeed committing an act of tort of trespass." But then my attitude is that if some DWP ****** knocks on your door, then before letting them in, ask what its about, and dont let them make threats, then letthem in to get it over with asap asthey will only try and get back at you some other way. Hope the MODS correct me on the above and not be too harsh in telling me Im wrong, again.

Hi Everyone. The A4E Exit Report (moving on report), the one you get on your last appointment with A4E before being thrown back to the JCP. Does anyone know how many pages there should be ? I received a two page report, but googling some page I didnt bookmark said there was 7 pages, and that we only get two but the full 7 pages are sent to DWP. Ive put in a SAR with the DWP, and they say there is only two pages. So just wanted clarification that there is only two pages and not seven.

Hi Everyone. I should have replied to this post a long time ago, but forgot Id even asked the question. But I appealed the sanction and had the money paid back. I had the DWP on a technicality, I used the line that "A statement is a statement of fact signed by someone who actually witnessed the incident. Just as if you were writing and signing a witness statement for the police, if you didnt witness the incident then you cant sign a statement to the facts, and thats what the WP08 form is, a witness statement to the facts. The WP08 was written and signed for by a member of staff who was in a different office / location, and didnt even witness the incident." I had requested all the paperwork under the DPA, put it all together and wrote a nice letter with the above statement, and hey ho, I got my money back. So nice little piece of advice here, always appeal after getting all the paperwork. It worked for me.

In fact Ive just been and donated now. Guess who's one happy chappy with a big grin on his face ))))

That is pure magic. Ive added that to my letter. My partner is next in there on Monday, we are going to let them kick off first with their threats, then she is going to hand over our letter. Im going to be making a donation thursday night as you guys have given me the piece of mind to have a good nights sleep tonight, knowing that IM IN CONTROL of this situation now. This has been going on since oct 2012, and I can see the light at the end of the tunnel. Ive had 20 months of having to fight them which could have been used more constructively actually looking for more jobs, rather than worrying about what verbal we're going to get at the next meeting. You dont know how helpful you have all been with this as to explain the whole complaint would take more of your server space than you probably have. So a BIG thank you to you all.

Hi Everyone. Ive now listened to the recorded conversation. The only two things the DWP might throw at us is "Data Protection" because of all the other claimants and the staffs own privacy. Having listened to the recording, the only three clear voices we can hear is my partners, her advisor and the second advisor when she butts in. All the other background noise is garbled and not recognisable as anything specific, and nothing can be heard to anyone elses personal data. So I believe that as such there is no breach under the data protection act. And Im working on the basis that as public servants who are breaking the law, then the advisors have no right to privacy under the circumstances. Im getting another letter written and want to word it right as I know they are going to throw the above at me, so I want to nip that in the bud from the start.

Antone, your brilliant, thank you for that.