OK, I figured it out myself. I know what I have to do. Thanks, this is a great site! The latter part of this letter gave me my angle of attack: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?829-Charges-successfuly-reclaimed-from-RBS-last-year

I've just realised that I've probably been getting these charges for a long time. This latest one has seen them strip £153 from my account. How do I go about claiming this money back? I should point out that I specifically asked for no over-draught when I signed up for the account around 6 years ago. I think I may have had this happen a few times over the years and simply not noticed. Thanks in advance for any help.

Hi mate. I'm actually self employed now and am setting up a second business. Thankfully i doubt i will ever have to deal with those morons ever again. been on a huge learning curve the past couple of years. However from my experience with the job center it seemed to me that the best way was to go on the offensive. accuse them of something... complain, complain, complain. you have to do it all in writing and it helps if youa re good at writing and can twist situations to your own advantage. Above all you should always bear in mind that you have human rights and that the government would actually be breaking the law by not paying you what you are due as a citizen of this country. If you appeal and blame it on them that you didn't show up... for example use your illness and say the advisor insulted you or offended you in some way, mocked you or your situation. This puts them on the back foot and needing to defend themselves. I can't tell you exactly how to do it... just remember that it is never your fault. Find a way to blame it on them and you should win your appeals. unfortunately this will not prevent you getting sanctioned int he first place. in my case it led to an 8 week sanction one time that I had to fight to win back. it's not all plain sailing... just don't lie down and take it.

always get a receipt of proof when you hand in an appeal... always hand them in personally too, never post them... even with the proof they will sometimes get 'lost'.

could you show me where i've specified the court system involved? My point is that she should only agree to pay in principle, and should first await the court decisions as to when the alleged offence took place. In her addled state she could well have gotten confused over the dates, and often a court case will help clarify all of the little details. So long as she promises to pay anything owed once the decisions are final then she loses nothing. also any payments made in relation to compensation for a criminal offence are proposed by criminal courts... so they could make her pay back only £75 a month, depending on her circumstances. the overpayments have arisen because of a criminal offence... this moves them out of the civil realm, imo.

OK, well the court would still be able to determine when the actual fraud started, the dates... only after hearing all of the mitigation. then the court could even decide that she doesn't have to pay anything back, what then? she may well have committed the fraud but it could have been caused through the negligence of job centre staff. So although guilty, she is not to blame.. this is why i wouldn't pay back a thing till after the court hearing.

say nothing at the interview and offer to pay back the monies at a fair rate. job done. if they want to waste public money taking you to court after offering to pay back the money then more fool them... IMO.

no you have to go guilty, being ignorant of the law is no excuse. what happens then is that your mitigating circumstances come into play. Of which you have plenty... any judge/magistrate in the land will feel for your situation. they're used to dealing with real criminals... you will be like a breath of fresh air. I'd stop making any payments and await the court decision. it could be that you don't actually owe all of that. don't worry, the courts are there to protect your interests, certainly so much more so than the people working for the benefits services.

nervous of what exactly? what are they going to do? why would you be important enough to go into a newspaper? yes they will probably watch you, if you're not doing anything wrong you don't have anything to worry about. If you have then tell your bf to disappear for a couple of months. no biggy.

Never answer any questions unless you want to incriminate yourself... always bear in mind that you are never obligated to answer any questions and that the burden of proof rests with the authorities. I honestly cannot believe they'd waste good money on these ridiculous accusations.

Because there is no need to offer an explanation... you are not obligated by law to do so. Then any decision made against you must be overturned as the evidence they have is not enough to lay claim to any real proof. The interview is a sham and devised, solely it seems to me, to gather more evidence from the client's own mouth. why would this take months? Even so you can claim hardship and crisis loans to see you through while the employees at these places figure out exactly what our rights really are.

there were aspiring doctors at your new deal program? so for somebody with mental health problems would you suggest they take psychiatric drugs? http://www.seroxatusergroup.org.uk/The%20Creation%20of%20Senseless%20Violence.pdf what you think you know has been told to you by somebody else and you are merely echoing their thoughts. Why not try thinking for yourself instead? just because a substance is banned this does not make it bad, and just because a substance is legal this does not make it OK. this is what i mean by thinking for yourself, if we all did it the world would run much better. Nobody could be fooled, you see. Nobody would be afraid to ask questions for fear of looking stupid. Nobody would be afraid to speak out for the same reasons. ask Professor Nutt about the dangers of cannabis: There aren't any... indeed it can actually help prevent lots of different types of cancers, not just prevent them but even cure them in certain cases. stress is pretty much a thing of the past while smoking weed. alcohol kills millions each year, not to mention the people it hospitalises through mental illness... why are we not up in arms to have it banned?

like i said, if she'd have kept her mouth closed then this would end up in court... and then she keeps her mouth closed again and the case is thrown out of court through lack of evidence. Putting myself in her shoes I would have found being interviewed by job centre staff as a bit of a joke, and refused to answer any questions put to me. then if the claim is refused on the flimsy evidence i would question the right to make that decision on that basis. also they would get overturned right away before any court action anyway as they couldn't possibly win. Also if they lost I could then sue them for damages after visiting the doctor to complain about how stressed out and depressed I am because of all this mess, again i'd probably win as they just haven't got the time nor money to fight court cases. cheaper to pay me off through an out of court settlement. fraudulent claims are one thing, but to question people the way they do is not right. It's degrading and derogatory... the law of our country certainly doesn't give them the right. Only we as individuals can give them that. the reason i say to go no comment is to avoid incriminating yourself with your statement. it's pretty obvious. whether guilty or innocent it is better to keep your trap shut.

thanks... i'll look into that. I'm just slightly worried as technically i'm the owner of a business yet i haven't started trading yet. would i still need to fill in a VAT return? If so, would i also get this through the post automatically or would i need to do it off my own initiative? Don't worry about answering if you don't have the answers to hand, i'm sure i will find out soon enough.

yet at the same time stress is merely a symptom of life, an ordinary symptom of the day to day drudgery. This is why we have alcohol and cigarettes, stimulants/depressants to help one unwind after a stressful day. stress is our number 1 predator. smoking a joint of cannabis in the evening is far better for you and will relieve symptoms of stress... any mental health issues will also come to the fore and you will be able to deal with them. if not then you're probably better off in a hospital somewhere. My experience of people on the sick is that maybe as much as 50% of them are lying. claiming for depression, unable to cope... i think people look to the government too much to help them out. over burden the NHS with people brought up in this nanny culture. somebody steps on your toe and you can sue them up to 3 years later. how can an accident ever be somebody else's fault? Isn't this slightly at odds with the very definition? anyway getting off track now... but if you want to have a stress free life, less visits to the doctor, then smoke a joint of cannabis every night.

Yeah i remember hearing something about these new initiatives on the news and they got me excited. this country is looking for innovative business ideas and i believe i fall into this category. However i remember thinking the same thing about seetec and it took till the second appointment with them till i realised they were only there for themselves. Only there to look good enough to collect the funding, just like pertemps. now that's what you call throwing money away. anyway, thanks for the words of encouragement. My seetec 'arrangement' finishes early in December and i'm hoping to sign off not long afterwards with the help of a self employment type scheme. i could really do with some straight forward help in regards to understanding VAT as my business is already registered to pay it due to importing from India (to do so you need a VAT number). well you need a temporary one, but i got confused and got a real one... i had to learn quick as i didn't know about all the paperwork till the day the stuff landed and delays are fined, hence my getting the real VAT number.

thankyou for the above post... I wish you well in your own endeavour too. An update on what is happening with my own endeavour... there is no help available to me from organisations outside seetec and seetec (Marky boy Smith) refuse to let me go to one of these companies as they themselves will be losing the government funding for me. However seetec also are unwilling themselves to help me set up this business. It has been almost a year since i was first placed onto seetec's books and i am at the stage now where i have already bought and shipped in my first load of stock from India. I have also bought the packaging and lids etc. the only thing left i have to do is get the labels and pay for a credit card processor and i am good to go. It's taken me almost a year to do this and all the while seetec have been getting government funding for me and i haven't showed up since my second interview. In almost a year. what are the rules? what is supposed to happen? how come i haven't been sanctioned for life? Indeed i have been sanctioned only once and now as we are nearing the end i have been sanctioned again. In a whole year? anyway, the point is that now i am coming to the end of my seetec journey and i will then be eligible for the right support. if i had the support to begin with i would be paying taxes right now... indeed i already have on import duties etc. seetec can kiss my derrier.

wouldn't it be better to refuse to answer any questions? the evidence is all circumstantial, and not exactly hard... the purpose of the interview is surely to make you provide them with words they can then use out of context to suit themselves. The whole set up is a joke, quite frankly... and how they love frightening people that have never been in trouble before. whole thing is a charade, imo. Nothing to be afraid of and always try to maintain your dignity, never answer any questions you do not feel comfortable answering, not even the police can make you do that. They are burdened with gathering evidence against you, provable evidence... and as you are obviously innocent it is in my opinion that you were not obligated to say a thing during the interview and that despite their flimsy 'evidence' they were still left with it all to prove. especially surprised your brief didn't advise you to no comment the interview. what sort of solicitor would be used in this type of thing, criminal or civil?

I have had many friends in these same circumstances over the years and they have always been refused crisis loans on the grounds that their claims are no longer live. or rather they have been put off from claiming by job centre staff because of that reason. good information, thanks for sharing.

stress anywhere can make you ill. it is the single largest killer on the planet. Not even the pharmaceutical companies can keep with that kind of mortality rate. try going to your doctor and ask for some highly addictive anti depressants, they'll probably want to sell you them by the bucket load. well hey, that's what drug dealers do i suppose. what i find ironic is how illegal drugs are not actually forced upon anybody, the punters go looking for that particular drug. whereas with doctors and big pharma we are forced onto cocktails of expensive, often needless, drugs that can cause more harm than the good they are trying to achieve. ironic too how drugs like alcohol and tobacco kill millions of people every year, not to mention the stress on the body after consuming large amounts of either yet a drug of great medicinal value is denied us, even demonised and the sole reason for that demonisation is because the pharmaceutical companies can not control it. they could make no money from it. Even so they are synthesising this wonder drug as we speak, for reasons that it kills cancer cells in several different types of cancer... breast, brain, blood... there is quite a list. Taking this drug will work to help prevent cancers and help relieve stress. Big Pharma are seeking to synthesise this drug and charge us thousands of pounds more than the street value of the drug. That drug is of course cannabis, specifically THC, CBD, THCV and CBN.

no worries... just ask for a payment booklet suitable to a level you can pay back. they're really helpful when you actually want to pay.

if you're already employed and your claim has ended then you have no rights to claim anything. You should inform your employer of your circumstances and ask for a partial payment of your wages. if that can't happen then you'll have to borrow money from friends and family to survive. Now that you're working though it will all be worth it. struggle for 6 weeks and then reap the rewards.

There is no suddenly about it, any rulings made must be backed up by law. This is why the rulings of an employee at the job centre don't count for anything and luckily (judging from your posts) neither do their opinions on people. Bridging allowance is not wrong advice and applies to people under 18 years of age. Neither is the advice on always winning an appeal. So long as you were available for work or have a reasonable excuse for not turning up at an appointment then you cannot lose the appeal. All you need is your word... your word has no rights to be doubted by any authority unless proven so in a court of law. You may well think you know the rules, i know how to break them and have spent a large part of my worthless life doing just that. In and out of prison for my early years, although reformed now for the past 12 years, i spent a long time signing on. A long time learning how the system works. Never have i completed a training course, never have i knowingly entered into a contract saying that i will either. I have been sanctioned more times than i can remember and i've won my appeals every time. Yes so you make a claim that you know is going to get refused, as you refuse to sign to the effect that you will follow the mandatory stipulations on the agreement. This means simply that you do not qualify for JSA payments but you will still qualify for hardship payments. i think that should explain what i mean adequately now by not needing to be sanctioned... your thoughts seem to be confined to a little box. to break the rules you got to think outside of it businessmen that pay taxes and employees that also pay taxes will get flagged within weeks, no need for spotters in the job centre. Do the spotters get to wear a deer stalker, or would that give it away? What about drug dealers? they sign on every week and pull up in mercedes or beamers, dripping with gold and some of them packing... do you investigate those guys? pretty obvious what they are. is that information collected, or are you just looking for the more obvious 'fireman's uniform' type of stuff? In regards to the crisis loan application and the passport used as ID containing £80. How do you know what that money was for? the money could well have been to pay off a loan shark. also a crisis loan is a loan... a loan in a crisis, not much money is claimed and although it is usually claimed by heroin addicts looking for a fix it still is a loan that has to be paid back. so why question the fact that they need the money? the only time you should question it is when they repeatedly phone every week, like one lady i'm unfortunate enough to know as she is my neighbour. she gets crisis loans all the time for heroin. why does she get them all the time? because she knows the right things to say... so long as the right things are said (doesn't matter if you are actually carrying them out) then you cannot be denied what is rightfully yours as a citizen of this country. it doesn't need to be earned, it is owed by birthright.

well i think we're just getting pedantic now... to sanction is to penalise for breaking a rule... yet if you don't agree to those rules in the first place then how can you be charged with breaking them? Those rules are not forced upon you, you have to agree to them and sign to that effect. yet if you do not then those rules can have no legal bearing. The decision goes off and they can refuse your claim for JSA... how can they sanction you for something you have never agreed to? a legality that does not exist yet as you have never signed to agree to it? Not only am I not lying but I have also given this advice to other people over the years and they have successfully made fresh claims without sanctions from the last claim following them. if you get sanctioned on one claim how can this legally bind you to a FRESH claim? Fresh is new... what does one do when they start all over again? they start afresh. what happens when i visit an advisor in the job centre? they use their forefinger (as very few can actually type properly) and type the information into a computer. A claimant could do it themselves... Indeed a simple software program could handle what the staff in a job centre do and do it far far more efficiently. How does a staff member tell if somebody is working part time? Who are they to judge? Are they trained to spot people working part time? if so what is the criteria? i could do with a laugh. Maybe if they come to sign on in a fireman's uniform? think that would give it away?

No it isn't... the main criteria are here: You don't have to be sanctioned, you just may not meet the criteria. for example... you decide that you're not going to make any stipulations in your jobseeker's agreement. if you refuse to make any stipulations on the agreement as to what you will do to find work then your claim for JSA will be refused and you must claim Hardship. How can you be sanctioned on a claim you've only just made? and if you refuse to follow any stipulations ever then you can never actually be sanctioned, unless it is for life.. or until you decide to make some stipulations. If you make a claim and refuse to follow any rules you can claim hardship. no need for an actual sanction... and it can equal the same as a full JSA payment. well that has never happened to me. I've done it 3 times and never has the sanction followed me. the reason for that is that sanctions can only apply to the relative claim. You can't be sanctioned on one claim and then they suddenly decide to place it onto a new claim... because it is a fresh claim. everything is new. I've done it 3 times... maybe i'm lying? fraud would not go through the roof at all, lol. it's all done on computer these days anyway... it would be far more efficient and cost effective if people could sign from computer points. Then rather than have a bunch of morons sitting in the job centres doing hardly a thing and moaning about their minimum wage we could increase fraud detection and investigators. it's win win.