Jump to content
Twitter - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'

Mike_hawk

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,686

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Mike_hawk

  1. Mike_hawk
    I'm maybe being a bit thick, I thought if it ever happened to me I'd know all the elephant in the room questions but I can't think of anything sensible to ask...... It all started a month or so ago with excruciating stomach pains and loss of appetite [a biggie for me], then a few days ago it got so bad that I went to the quacks and had bloodtests within 72 hours was referred to the local hospital, I'm a funny shade of yellow at the mo so I guess I knew something was going a bit wonky. should have had the biopsy today but it was cancelled and replaced with a phonecall and Oramorph + Zomorph 60mg capsules.... .. I suppose the question is, has anyone had experience of this [Pancreas and Liver] with a relative and how long do I have? I'm not daft and have googled until I'm blue in the face and nothing really tells you what to expect and when.. ..... honestly, I'm 48 and pretty much at peace with everything [might be the morphine tho, lol] so any life experiences gratefully received. The cancer nurse was lovely and asked if I had any questions but for the first time in my life I couldn't think of anything sensible
  2. Mike_hawk
    I'd be inclined to draft something to the other party referring to your conversation and its reluctance to make application to set aside the judgment. If it knows it had no cause v you and seems intent on [mis]using the judgment as leverage on another party it should really be brought to courts notice within the application....... also, I assume you'll be including within the application a request for an order to recover your costs.
  3. Mike_hawk
    Talktalk doesn't seem to understand free........ here's my 'freebie', apparently I'm just 1 of many thousands clogging up its phone lines to advise it of my utter disgust. Monthly Charges Mobile Part Month 077******** Value (v4) - 1m SIM Only 22 Dec - 31 Dec 1.61 ^ 077******** 100MB Free Data Boost 22 Dec - 31 Dec free ^ Total 1.61 Advance 077******** Value (v4) - 1m SIM Only 1 Jan - 31 Jan 5.00 077******** 100MB Free Data Boost 1 Jan - 31 Jan free Total 5.00 Total New Charges including VAT 6.61 Total Payable including VAT 6.61
  4. Mike_hawk
    Perhaps a post to remind anyone looking in at a later date to check their heads of [inco] terms when importing goods to the UK.
  5. Mike_hawk
    Thought you'd had a reply [re; tribunal] but it seems to have disappeared Given the value involved it may be a simpler, quicker and cheaper option to issue a money claim on the sct........ would certainly help if you could evidence the contractual term/s regarding expenses.
  6. Mike_hawk
    That's unhelpful and entirely inaccurate.
  7. Mike_hawk
    That's plainly wrong and very naive........ the consignee contracts the carriage, there's no getting away from incoterms. This has been discussed numerous times on this forum.
  8. Mike_hawk
    What export duties are we considering? Its probably a valid point; the eu doesn't impose export duties, UK exports are zero rated for VAT purposes [VAT MOSS excepted ] so I suppose it will fall to competition and the will of the incumbent government at the time.
  9. Mike_hawk
    Unless anyone is naive enough to believe an exit wouldn't affect their household budget surely we should be asking ourselves whether the eu provides us with access to stable trade. £/capita is iro £120.00 [gone up a tad with the incumbents fudging the employment/gdp data], do we believe the current government would negotiate down a little over £2.00 per week or do we believe it would be driven by taxation?
  10. Mike_hawk
    It wouldn't be unusual for the other side to request an extension to file defence whilst negotiations are ongoing, nor would it be unusual for it to browbeat a LiP into a relatively low compromise or acceding to a demand with the threat of application for costs. Without sight of the content of its correspondence I can only guess that it seeks your agreement for an extension absent which it will make application for same requesting costs in the case. Posts 8 & 10 should provide you with ample information regarding 'costs in the case'
  11. Mike_hawk
    I'd think whatever you send it will reject, I personally wouldn't waste the price of a stamp on responding but........ that's me If you do feel inclined to reply [and assuming it is relying on pofa, it'll be buried somewhere in the ntk] you could remind it that its out of time and it would be sensible to cancel the charge.
  12. Mike_hawk
    My preference would be in for trade agreements but out for article 45........ I suppose the question is whether you can have your cake and eat it
  13. Mike_hawk
    I think its code 35 for non display of a disc Hopefully someone versed in your situation will be along later to assist
  14. Mike_hawk
    Seems about right for nominee fees, usually around the £2k mark + 15-20% of realisations If you entered into an IVA and it failed because you declined to service at the agreed rate then it seems highly unlikely the FOS would find in your favour
  15. Mike_hawk
    I think what you meant to say is the posts were shamefully picking away at the vile and disgusting attitude of the current incumbents to the poorest in UK society.
  16. Mike_hawk
    .......and get our kids to repay it five fold over the next generation
  17. Mike_hawk
    Not sure anyone has suggested that? The key is funding and the way that funding is allocated. Currently there is a pupil premium for the disadvantaged, this does not necessarily mean 'poor' although the bulk of the expenditure is for those who qualify for free school meals, higher premiums are also available for fostered, adopted, those moving from local authority care, PRU's to mainstream etc etc As I said; Grammar schools are constantly looking for ways to shift the benefit of the available budget.
  18. Mike_hawk
    The education budget is finite, there is no spending a little extra here or there to satisfy a minority. In the instance of 16-19 year olds real term spend has reduced year on year post 2010, no ringfencing applicable to that particular age group. Grammar schools historically robbed Peter to pay Paul....... protected budgets for years 7-11 [1st to 5th form in old money] would be used to offset the cost of operating sixth form classes with low pupil numbers. With the introduction of the pupil premium for the disadvantaged it has had to look for ways to shift the local budget in its favour. I thinks its great to have aspirations but should that be at the expense of the disadvantaged?
  19. Mike_hawk
    How would a supporter of selective [Grammar] education suggest it be funded? Do we return to right wing values of underfunding the majority to support the minority or do we continue with the fairer allocation of resources?
  20. Mike_hawk
    Oh dear........ I understand the scrutineer has a solution - it is now actively advertising for an assessor to assess the assessors [old and new]
  21. Mike_hawk
    It still wants its 180k........ would it risk breach of contract by not responding to those appeals still within its control?
  22. Mike_hawk
    Simplest thing to do is ignore the shysters
  23. Mike_hawk
    Anything from it reduced to writing or was this all agreed over the phone? It probably continued to encumber the account with interest and/or charges during the repayment period. If nothing in writing I'd go with the SAR and hope that whoever you spoke to recorded the terms of the repayment plan and it shows up on any notes. Don't telephone it, if it knows what info you are looking for you can pretty much guarantee it will be redacted from any data request. Oh and, RBS is a shower and I can't imagine you'll ever get this resolved with telephone calls.
  24. Mike_hawk
    What were the stated terms of the repayment plan?
  25. Mike_hawk
    Hi Ford Yep, I did question this with the FCA and whilst it agreed it had the authority to enforce the provision it does not seem to have the will to do so. Dear xxxxxxxxxxxxx Section 50 CCA makes it an offence to send a circular (with a view to gain) to a minor inviting the minor to borrow money (among other credit related issues). We have had the power to impose FSMA enforcement powers for breaches of the CCA since 1 April 2014. The other relevant point is that the Illegal Money Lending Team also undertake prosecutions in relation to the CCA. Yours sincerely, xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Associate | Customer Contact Centre Financial Conduct Authority | www.fca.org.uk Consumer Helpline: 0800 111 6768

Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:- 923 Finchley Road
London NW11 7PE

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...