If you don't use the landline, I can't be the only one thinking you could just unplug it and throw it in a cupboard? You don't need it in order for your internet to work, so why keep something plugged in that's driving you so mad? Edit: Sorry @dx100uk I missed you suggesting the same thing before I hit 'Post'

Maybe others will have a different view, but in mine it is your responsibility to carefully check and assess your surroundings before you move your car. The Highway Code appears to back that view up. Rule 202 (my emphasis): Look carefully before you start reversing. You should: - use all your mirrors - check the ‘blind spot’ behind you (the part of the road you cannot see easily in the mirrors) - check there are no pedestrians (particularly children), cyclists, other road users or obstructions in the road behind you. - Reverse slowly while - checking all around - looking mainly through the rear window - being aware that the front of your vehicle will swing out as you turn. I'd be surprised if the garage were liable for your failure to check your surroundings before moving off, but I've been wrong plenty of times before.

Yes, it's the total cash value of the car. The insurer doesn't care how much you're paying over the course of your lease, your monthly payments etc, they're only interested in the total value of the car, because it's the gap between that and its value at the point of loss they would cover through the GAP insurance policy.

To successfully take action against you the auction house would have to prove they suffered some form of loss. In my humble opinion, for them to successfully do that would mean somehow proving that the auction that went awry was their only opportunity to sell that car, and/or that selling it at any other time would mean a substantial reduction in the sale price, your erroneous bids notwithstanding. You have your previous completed transaction with them that demonstrates you are not a troublesome bidder, and that in all likelihood, something did go wrong with their website. DX is definitely correct that you should ignore them. This site doesn't advise getting involved in 'letter tennis' as DX usually puts it, because it's really only an invitation from you to them to start writing you more letters and upping the aggression factor. If - and it's an extremely big if - you ever receive a letter headed 'Letter before claim' or similar, you should come back here. Aside from that remote possibility, you should get on with your life, and probably avoid that auction site in future.

I'm no expert, but assuming the NHS has an agreement with this clinic, whose role it is to provide NHS treatment to patients, I would have thought they may be covered by a legitimate interest clause. Provided they don't start making unsolicited contact with you about other treatments, offering additional services, or share your information with other parties who do not have direct involvement in your care, from my layman's perspective I would be surprised to hear they've done anything wrong in this case.

In relation to your Hermes complaint, you do not need a solicitor. BankFodder, dx100uk and other knowledgeable contributors will guide you through all the steps you'll need to follow. The reason BankFodder is insistent that you read up, is because there will be lots of terminology and processes that will need to be followed accurately, and trying to explain everything to you at the same time as guiding you through the process will not work. You must gain a thorough grounding in what will happen, how, and when before you embark on this process. Use the site search feature to search for "Hermes". There are no end of stories just like yours. Read a few of those threads from start to finish. In terms of your other worries, the best advice is to split those out into their own threads, one for each debt.

It doesn't help your immediate situation, so for that I apologise, but when you take out insurance cover, one of things you're asked to confirm you will do is notify the insurer of any change in circumstance, for you, the vehicle, or any of the named drivers. Admiral's position is that a 'student' exposes a lower risk profile than a 'receptionist', for whatever reason, and that had you fulfilled your obligation to notify them of the occupation change your monthly premium would have gone up, or, if you paid annually, they would have requested a one-off fee from you. So it's not quite true to say the "policy was correct". It was when you took out the cover, but was no longer a true reflection of the insured risk at the time of the accident. That's why it's probably reasonable that they're making those deductions. I think also with car valuations rose-tinted glasses can be a slight issue. The special edition interior of your own car may have increased its value originally, but in a car of that age with over 100,000 miles on the clock, I really don't see it making any difference at all, but I've been wrong plenty of times before. I would follow UB's advice above. Write to them, but include those valuations you've found, and let them know what you're willing to settle for. That's probably your quickest route to a Final Response, which is what you need before you can approach the ombudsman, or decide to just suck it up and stump up the difference.

I hope you don't find this comment insensitive, because that's not how I mean it, but I can imagine the first response you'll get from the council is: "if the road was icy, and you knew that, why weren't you driving at a speed that would have avoided such a severe accident?". If you're lucky to be alive, you must have been driving in a manner similar to the way you would have been in warm, dry, conditions?

@phineasferb12 DX can correct me if I'm wrong, but I'll give you a bit of a wider explanation in the hope of putting your mind at rest. When you were caught by the security guard he's taken your details and potentially - but not definitely - passed them back to a company called Retail Loss Prevention (RLP), or another similar company, for whom he likely works. They will contact you requesting that you pay money to recoup the cost of the security guard's time in dealing with you. That in itself is nonsense because his time is fully covered through the contractual price Boots will have agreed with the security provider. He may have referred to that as a 'fine', and it's even possible they will too, but no private person or company has any power to 'fine' you anything for any reason, only a court can do that. What they may send you is a speculative invoice which they are hoping you will blindly pay in fear of repercussions that can never come, because they have no legal basis to pursue you beyond a few scary letters, which you can safely ignore. You are 18, so if they choose to write, they will write directly to you and not your parents. So, providing you don't share a name with your mum, anything that comes will come to you. It's your choice whether you should intercept and destroy those, or treat it as a shake-up and 'fess up. The bottom line is this; you were lucky, it's done with and you should treat it as a valuable lesson.

Maybe when your boss returns it would be worth a quiet "I noticed something that struck me as odd" conversation out of earshot with anyone else, posed in a sort dismissive "I'm not actually seriously questioning this" tone to see what he says. If nothing else, it would be interesting to know how this came about, and you never know when a little "inside knowledge" might help you with your boss.

Understand that I'm nowhere near being competent to answer this, so take my comment with a pinch of salt until someone more experienced has answered, but reading a little more about your situation reveals this article: Creditor takes money from your bank account WWW.CITIZENSADVICE.ORG.UK Information on third party debt orders to take money owed to you to pay creditors, how they affect your bank account and what to do if a frozen bank account leads to hardship. Which appears to suggest, at the bottom, under the section "What happens if a 3rd Party Debt Order is Made Final", that the order can only affect money in your account when the order is made, and not money paid in later. So does that mean that when your next benefit amount is paid in, that isn't frozen, only what's in there now is? Mods - that's obviously a link to a different site above, which you might choose to remove if it's not allowed or advisable. In fact, just remove the whole post if that's the case.

You could always write to the store manager who refused your refund and point out to him that you did indeed get your refund, despite his best efforts, and that his behaviour and lack of customer service has been brought to the attention of the CEO's office. You could also include a copy of your correspondence with head office confirming your right to the refund. It'll do absolutely not good in terms of making you feel better (which is what you want), but I'm sure it'll ruffle his feathers.

Whether you can be identified from your IP or not isn't as simple as a quick 'no'. Before we can answer that with any accuracy, you'd want to know whether your internet provider has issued you with a static IP address, or a dynamic one. Most ISPs issue dynamic IPs that change, either when you restart your router, or when the lease for your current IP expires, but some, and most if you request it, will issue a static IP that is uniquely yours and doesn't change. A static IP is essential for some people, and more so now than ever because we're working from home a lot more. If you have cause to remotely access a computer or internet-connected device in your place of work, your work network firewall needs configured to let traffic from your IP in, but block everything else. That wouldn't be possible if your IP keeps changing, so in cases like that people need static IPs. If you have a static IP then you could well find searching a domain registry would reveal the IP to be assigned to you. Most registrars even show you on a map precisely where the IP is registered to, so yes, it's technically possible to identify you from your IP, and that's before you start going anywhere near trying to get the information from your ISP, who could of course tell exactly who used which IP, even dynamic ones. Fortunately, ISPs seem to be quite cagey about releasing that sort of data. Before I slept soundly, I'd want to know whether my IP was static or dynamic.

When renewal time comes around you might want to think about phoning a few insurers for quotes, rather than going online only. I say that because, many moons ago when I was at university, I worked for Post Office car insurance, and our internal systems allowed me to differentiate between a fault and non-fault accident. From memory I don't think many online quotation tools do, they simply ask you if you've been involved in any accidents within the past 5 years. It may also be worth seeing what the quote to renew is from your current insurer. They will of course know liability for the first accident was fully accepted by the other side and so it shouldn't put your premium up. In those situations it's normal to retain your NCD as well. Edit to say I agree with Ethel, you must inform your insurer quickly about this latest incident. You are obliged to do so, and in any case you must protect yourself against any 3rd party claims for damage or injury.

One other suggestion, which I didn't see as I was skimming the thread, would be to visit your local phone repair centre and ask them to look at your phone diagnostics. The repair agent should be able to tell, using the appropriate diagnostic tools, which they will have, when your phone was switched on or off and when. They could then more than likely print off or produce a report for you.

I'm the farthest thing from a legal expert that you'll come across, take my suggestion with that in mind, but would it be possible to approach the seller's solicitor and ask them to put pen to paper guaranteeing the document is compliant? Your solicitor is, after all, working under your instruction, if you could gain some sort of confidence, possibly by way of written guarantee, then you might feel confident enough to instruct your solicitor to move forward. That doesn't help you if the document turns out not to be compliant, but it may at least give you some form of recourse. Note to CAG experts: If this is just silly then please go ahead and get rid of this post, I don't want to confuse things.

I would suggest as a way of forearming yourself that you pop onto this website: Check the MOT history of a vehicle - GOV.UK WWW.GOV.UK Check the MOT history of a vehicle from 2005 onwards, including if it passed or failed, its mileage and why it failed Using that government service you can input the registration mark of your vehicle and determine whether it indeed has a current MOT certificate, and if it does, what advisories have been recorded against it.

One thought that comes to mind is to make sure the Police are aware of the mix up. I can imagine most thieves change the car's number plate after theft, but if not, and the Police add your vehicle's details to their ANPR database using the car's original number plate it'll never be picked up. They'll need to know to record the car under your private plate.

I'm no financial expert, but I have a few thoughts. If you search around you'll find information that suggests you should keep your credit usage vs. credit used ratio at or below 30%. That's in the context of a single card, but I suppose you could extrapolate that out and say you should do that for all your cards. If you do that, then of course your total card utilisation will also be 30% or less. My second thought is; are you certain these cards are all still active? A lot of credit providers will close the credit account after a certain period of purchasing inactivity. So it's possible, although you would have been notified, that some of those cards you've got stashed away won't actually be 'live' anymore. Credit providers don't have to warn you in advance of their intent to close your account either, only of the fact they have done, and that notification could have arrived electronically (edit - I mean this strictly in the context of an inactive account). My third thought is in relation to your comment about having too much credit available to you. Yes, I think that is a thing. A credit provider may well see how many lines of credit you have and decide that you pose too much of a risk for them. Firstly, if I were a lender I would want to know why you needed all these lines of credit, that seems odd, and it would lead me to wonder whether you knew you were going to have to rely on them in the near future. You probably also fit the pattern of people with gambling or other problems. I would also be aware of the potential financial mess you could land yourself in very quickly, and on the basis of how many creditors you'll have, the new provider could easily find themselves at the back of a very long line of people trying to secure the return of their money. Lastly, you're exposing yourself to fraud unnecessarily. The more cards you have, logically, the higher your overall risk is of becoming a fraud victim. Once again, I'm very much a lay person when it comes to finance. It's just my tuppence worth.

It's not a case of you asking them (or the people here) what the creditors will accept, it's case of you telling them what you will pay them. The time to have been worrying about saving your credit file was 4 months ago when at least 2 people advised you to get in touch with your creditors, before the proverbial hit the fan, and while there was an opportunity to drop your payments by way of agreement with the creditors. The only thing that may, possibly, save your credit file now is if you agreed to pay the cards off in full right away. If you can't do that then it's already too late and it's very likely your creditors have already, or will very shortly, start to trash your file. I don't think anyone's asked you this yet; when did you take out these cards and the loan?

Maybe things are different in Scotland (where I am), but don't the CSA simply act as an intermediary? Meaning they don't actually hold your money, they simply pass what you pay directly on to the recipient. Assuming they don't keep any payment over and above your agreement, they wouldn't owe you, would they, your former partner would, potentially. Maybe that's the crux of the issue, they have held onto the overpayment. Mods, please delete this if I've misunderstood or added confusion.

The Police will not be interested I wouldn't have thought as it's a civil matter, unless your grandmother or her sister choose to make some kind of allegation. Do you have any other family members who might mediate the process? It's clearly not advisable - for your own protection - for you to be in the house with either of them sans some other witness. If they're not happy with your friend fulfilling that role, suggest someone else or ask them who they would consider acceptable? I'm just trying to think of ways to defuse the situation. It seems to me on the basis of your description, that things are on a knife-edge and you haven't even regained access yet. It might be worthwhile writing to your grandmother, setting out your suggestions for retrieving your things and inviting her to respond. A letter can be 'tuned' for tone in a way a text message really can't. I often feel people come across very differently via text when compared to their true intention. I would personally avoid any further contact or response with the sister, she seems to be the gunpowder.

@Jackmeowy - Just a quick tip, the folks on this site are extremely knowledgeable and gracious with their time, but they don't have time to tease the details out of you. Could I suggest you bullet-point your story with dates (as close as you remember them, or look back at your emails), and set out a history of what has happened and when, who you've spoken to, what their response was etc. This needs to be understood before we go lunging towards a small claim.

I'd have thought the crux of the matter is the line: "should you leave the employment of the company at any time then the outstanding balance at that time would need to be immediately settled." You are leaving the company, just not by your own choice. I wouldn't have thought your method of leaving actually came into it, but I'm the farthest from an expert you'll find so...

I know this post isn't useful and I shouldn't be posting it, but I can't help but feel the OP is hopelessly naive about their future here. In my layman's view, the OP had a target on their back way before this harassment complaint raised its head. Remember when you said this: You were involved in all that BEFORE all of this harassment stuff came up! You can't honestly, reasonably, believe you have a long-term career here?