Sorry to have to ask this, does the family member still have legal 'mental capacity' to make his own decisions? Some stroke victims do not. And another blunt question, have doctors given any indication of his life expectancy? When local authorities do a finacial assessment for care home fees aren't debts like this deducted fron his remaining assets? So wouldn't paying it off in effect just save the local authority money with no benefit for the family member?

When did you last make a payment? Has anyone chased you since the last payment you made? In general if a creditor wants to enforce a CCJ more than 6 years after the judgement was issued they have to go back to court and get permission to do so. But they'd have to present the court with a strong case for why the debt wasn’t collected within the time limit, which makes a CCJ extension very difficult to achieve. In this case it's 13 years later and and hard to imagine the debtor would ever get permission from a court. So I reckon you can safely ignore them Have you checked your credit record to make sure it's no longer showing?

I appreciate you are asking for advice on it as a change of contract issue and hopefully @Emmzzi will be able to help you with that but I wanted to comment on the tax situation. "...they reducing the mileage allowance to £0.25 per mile instead and we will have to claim the remainder from HMRC..." If they mean claim the other 20p/mile you used to get (ie difference between 45p/mile and 25p/mile) then you can't claim it from HMRC. HMRC don't pay out mileage rates. They give you tax relief against your income. So you would only receive from HMRC 20% of the 20p/mile (if you are a Basic Rate Income Tax payer) or 40% of the 20p/mile (if you are a Higher Rate taxpayer.) So it wouldn't replace the full 20p/mile you have been receiving up to now. You don't say what your annual business mileage is but HMRC only allow a rate of 45p/mile for the first 10,000 miles a year of business mileage, reducing to 25p a mile for business mileage above that. So if you are doing over 10,000 business miles a year HMRC will only allow tax relief on the 20p/mile up to 10,000 miles anyway under the MAP (Mileage Allowance Payments) scheme. Over 10,000 miles your employer's 25p/mile is the maximum under MAP. But if your employer has been paying you a 45p/mile with no mileage limitation plus a car allowance for general wear and tear on your vehicle that is outside the HMRC MAP scheme. So I'm wondering if the change has happened because your employer has realised that aren't complying with HMRC tax rules?

Presumably addressed to you because LCS assumed that the email sent from your account was from you and not from your friend, as your friend didn't put their name on it. The email was a reply to their letter sent to your friend's property addressed to 'the Legal Owner' so I can see how they thought the Legal Owner is you. I imagine it isn't hard to discover someone's name if you know their email address, although it's not something I've ever had to do. If your friend agrees they owe this money and intends to pay it then they can tell LCS that and make the payment. That should resolve the matter. Alternatively your friend might want to identify themselves as the Legal Owner and dispute the bill under the back billing rules as this demand is for electricity used more than 12 months ago and apparently E.On have never sent any bills or reminders to the property. Approximately how much is the amount?

The bill is for a short period of 20 days from 11 February to 2 March 2022. What date did your friend complete their purchase and become the legal owner of the property? If my guess is correct that your friend became the owner on 11 February and switched to Octopus on 2nd March then I'd say your friend is responsible for the cost of electricty they used in that 20 day period, and the standing charge. If the supplier to the premises in that period was E.On then the money is owed to E.On. This is a common situation when buying a new property. Last time I sold a property the purchaser switched supplier as soon as they moved in but there was still a couple of weeks when they were using elctricity from the supplier I had been using. That supplier tried to bill me for the all the electricity used up to the date the new owner changed supplier. I refused to pay for any electricity used after the completion date of the sale and told them to chase the new owner for the couple of weeks owing. That may be what has happened here. Of course if your friend didn't complete the sale and become the owner until 2nd March the bill is nothing to do with them, it's for the previous owner.

Don't rip the letter up. Ignore it, yes, but best to keep it just in case you ever need to refer to it. Shove it somewhere where your mother won't find it and forget about it.

Zero. It's impossible for you to get a CCJ from these people. They are not a court, they have no legal powers, and cannot issue a CCJ. The clue is in the name: CCJ = County Court Judgement, so only a County Court could find you liable to pay this scamming charge, and even then you'd only get a CCJ if you ignored the Court's judgement and didn't pay it. We know of no case where these people have taken anyone to court. In the HIGHLY UNLIKELY event they took legal action they would have to follow correct legal procedures, follow the 'pre action protocols' etc. If you received those you'd come back here and tell us what's happening so we could help you win.

[I can't find this posted elsewhere on the Private Parking forum, apologies if I have missed it] Summary The government is seeking to gather evidence to inform our review of parking charges and debt recovery fees in the private parking industry. This consultation closes at 11:59pm on 24 September 2023 Who is this for: The government is keen to ensure that any further additional evidence which is material to the impact assessment is gathered through this call for evidence, therefore responses from all interested parties are invited and welcomed. However, this call for evidence is technical in nature and is likely to be of most interest to those involved specifically in the private parking industry who are likely to be best placed to assist the government with relevant evidence. /assets/static/govuk-opengraph-image-dade2dad5775023b0568381c4c074b86318194edb36d3d68df721eea7deeac4b.png Private parking code of practice: call for evidence - GOV.UK WWW.GOV.UK The government is seeking to gather evidence to inform our review of parking charges and debt recovery fees in the private parking industry.

You can't. The third party has issued a demand for compensation to your mother as occupier of the premises where the alleged incident occurred. Your mother can't transfer the claim to you. The most likely result of you contacting the solicitor and saying 'it was my dog' would be that you would be added to the claim as a co-defendant, not that your mother would be deleted from it. Were you there when the alleged incident occurred?

Pass it to your mother's/parents insurers asap. It doesn't matter what you believe, it may invalidate your mother's/parents' insurance if you try to deal with it yourself. Insurance companies are very well aware that third parties exaggerate, invent, and tell outright lies to try and get money from insurers. They deal with third party solicitors trying it on every day. They are well used to investigating the allegations and rejecting them if they can't be substantiated. All the reasons you think the driver isn't being truthful you can put in your/your mother's statement to insurers so that their lawyers can take them into account.

Why? The information has been given (presumably) with the driver's consent. You can disclose any personal information you like about yourself. Anyway there's a reason why the information is given, which is that if at a later date your insurers do make a compensation payment the NHS can make a recovery from the insurer of their treatment costs if the driver received hospital treatment. The DoB/NINO allows the injured person to be correctly identified.

Passing the letter to insurers to deal with is definitely not admitting liability. It's simply that your insurers deal with third party claims on your behalf. I'm not surprised the solicitor is acting for the driver personally as I believe all Evri delivery drivers are self-employed. To clarify the point Manxman raises about which insurer, I mean the household/home insurer of the occupier of the house where the driver was bitten. I assume the occupier is your mother/parents. If she/they has separate buildings and contents policies it is the insurers of the contents (not the buildings insurer) because the claim is being made against the occupier, it's an 'occupiers liability' claim. Whether there is any complication later because it is your dog not theirs we can't say at this stage. But don't overcomplicate it. Right now the claim hasn't been made against the dog's owner, it's been sent to the occupier of the premises where the incident occurred. Unsurprisingly it won't be addressed to them by name as the driver probably doesn't know their name. But there's little point in ignoring it on that technicality as the solicitor would soon be able to find out who occupies the premises by using enquiry agents if you do nothing. And the cost of that gets added to the claim.

Irrespective of the driver's motives and whether you think he is right you must send this letter to your insurers immediately and without replying to it yourself. It is a formal letter of claim from a solicitor alleging that your dog on your premises caused personal injury to the driver and wanting financial compensation from you. Your insurance policy will have a condition requiring you to send it straight to insurers and they will deal with the solicitor direct. If you don't do this your insurers could refuse to deal with the claim if the driver later took you to court. If insurers decide the driver has a case then your insurers will pay it. There is not normally any excess on cover for third party personal injury claims so insurers would pay from the first £. Your insurers will ask you for a written statement of what you know so you will have the chance to tell them everything you have told us here. EDIT I'm not sure whether this claim is against you or your mother. If it's against your mother then she must send it to her insurers.

Any claim against Ryanair based on disability discrimination under the Equality Act 2010 will require you to demonstrate that Ryanair knew you had a mental health disability, or could reasonably have been expected to know. [section 15 (2)]. Did you notify Ryanair of your disability? If not why do you believe they should reasonably have been expected to know you had a mental health disability before they put your luggage in the hold? Likewise any claim based on Ryanair having a greater duty of care to you than to passengers in general because of your mental health condition would require you to prove that Ryanair had actual knowledge of, or should have known about, your mental health. Why would they be expected to have that knowledge in this case?

Do you know for sure whether the CCTV shows the registration number of the car that caused the damage? That seems a key question to me. If the registration number cannot be read on the CCTV then even if you did get the recording you wouldn't be much further forward. I understand that the DVLA link only works if you have the registration number, hence my question about whether the CCTV actually shows it. I posted the link to show that if/when you do get the reg number it should be relatively simple to get from there to identifying the driver.