Jump to content

rapster01uk

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    9
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

2 Neutral
  1. Basically, the NHS pays for a certain amount for different type of lenses depending on what you need. If you have been told £39.10 for your lenses, these are what are called single vision lenses and the price means that the lenses are not that strong. If you needed stronger lenses, the voucher would be higher. If you needed double vision (Bifocals) then the voucher would be higher. All opticians have different methods of dealing with the frames. Some opticians will have certain frames that would be included in your prescription voucher value. Other opticians would have different frames. All opticians obviously do different frames at various prices, and the value of your voucher would be used as part payment towards that price. Some opticians price their frames as price before voucher discount, others try to show how much you would pay after the voucher (however this is difficult as the vouchers can vary in value). Then there is the additional extras, if you chose anti glare or tinted glasses then the price would go up again. So to work out how much your glasses cost. Look at the price of the frame (this usually includes the price of single vision lenses) and if you had any additions to the lenses. So if a frame is priced at around £99 then you would expect to pay around £60 after the basic voucher is taken off. However if you had anti glare or tinted lenses then you would expect to pay between £10 and £40 extra as well.
  2. http://refreshinglawltd.co.uk/2015/01/post-tupe-transfer-p45-issues/ Under Tupe law, there should be no need for a P45, as the job stays the same, just working for a new company instead.
  3. It's not so bad then. 1250L is the standard tax code, and means he can earn £12500 pounds without paying tax, and then just pay tax on anything he earns over that amount. Due to technically being out of work, and claiming UC, and now going back to work, the code is saying that he will pay tax on anything earned over £6500 pounds now, but it is under review and should change within the next 8-12 weeks, and if he has overpaid in the meantime, then it will be refunded via his paycheck. The only reason for this is I am assuming that while shielding, his company did not keep him on the books. If HMRC have got a record of him being on the books, and claiming UC, this will be them determining that he hasn't been trying to fraud the system by being paid as employed at the same time as claiming UC. Once they clear that up, then they will correct the tax code. So long as all his earnings and benefits all add up and they are happy then it will be back to normal.
  4. Is the 1250BR his code from before shielding? Before shielding, the tax code would have been 1250 as this is the personal amount allowed to earn before tax. It should then have been followed by a single letter. The BR at the end means it is an emergency tax code, and that you receive no PFA, this is usual if you have more than one source of income. This code means that all the earnings from this income will be taxed. The 605T code is a temporary code, and shows that your tax is still being reviewed. The changes in codes is due to the change in circumstances, firstly he was in work, then claiming UC while shielding (unpaid I assume), and then going back to work again. They should sort themselves out, but you can always sign up to HMRC and keep an eye on the codes yourselves, and query anything with them as well.
  5. From what I can recall, the first 3 days are unpaid with SSP. So you would only get paid for remaining days. If you are rota'd in to work for more than 3 days a week (regardless of contract) then I believe that you should get paid for them, but it is not compulsory, and they could only pay you for your contracted hours instead. So if you were rota'd for 10 days you should get paid for 7 days, but if you are contracted for 6 days you would only get paid for 3. Then Tax and NI still get's taken off that amount. Also to get SSP you have to earn over £118 per week, and the amount payable (based on full time work) is £94.25 per week. If you believe you should have been paid more, speak to HMRC enquiry line and they will advise on course of action.
  6. I realise. I had no problem with paying the DCA as these were accounts that I was aware of, and knew that I had defaulted on, and I had agreed managable payment plans for each account. All of my dealings with them have been online, and email, very rarely by phone as I don't trust spoken conversations and can't be bothered to buy and setup recording equipment to record my calls. My problem arises with this sole account, that appears to come from a Solicitor firm, even though it is the same firm, with the same address. And the fact that it went to court without me even receiving a form from the court to mount a defence. When I have tried to email them, their attitude is they can't deal with it by email as they can't prove my identity.
  7. Last moved 7 years ago, but all of the agreements that I was dealing with were all accounted for, regardless of address For instance I had accounts with JD Williams, SimplyBe and Very. All 3 of these I know about and are dealing with However the account that has gone to court I have been informed is for SimplyBe, which never showed up on the debt collection website as a second account so I was never aware of any outstanding payments so was unable to come to an agreement prior to the letter from the solicitor. I believe that we did have two seperate accounts for this catalogue. When the letter from the solicitor arrived, as I stated earlier, I tried to find out from them exactly where this account came from, I explained to them that I am querying it, as it had never shown up on the DCA website prior. I made a couple of token payments while disputing the claim, to show that I was willing to pay, so long as it was the correct account. I have two logons to the DCA, one under my name for my debts, and one for my partners...This account never showed up under either login... The Judgement arrived this week, again, I never received any paperwork prior to this, so did not know it had gone to court, was unable to send in any defence, and now do not know who to speak to in order to get the amount I have to pay lowered, as I am unable to afford the amount the court has set.
  8. Can anyone advise... I have been with Lowells for a couple of years at least. On their website I could see all the accounts that they hold and I have arrangements in place for each of them. Earlier this year, I received a letter form Lowells solicitors regarding another account that they say had gone unpaid and Lowells had passed it on to them... I queried this account, as it had never shown up on the Lowell site previously, so I was unaware of it, and thought it might be a duplicate account, as I knew how many catalogue accounts I had held, and they all appeared to be accounted for. Their reply was that they could only discuss the one account, as they had no information about any other accounts. This week I have received a Judgement for Claimant form, it seems that they took it to court, but I never received any paperwork in order to send my defence in, and now I am being instructed to pay £100 per month, which I cannot afford. Firstly, do I need to contact the court regarding the payments to see if they can come to an arrangement that I can afford? What is the best way to do this, in person, phone, email? Secondly, how do I go about finding details on all my accounts to check that this is not a duplication of another account that I am already paying?
  9. I joined train2game in 2015, I was working on an 8 hour contract at the time so money was very tight, but I saw this as a way to get a better job, was told very heavily how much they were Tiga accredited by the salesperson, over the last couple of years, I have had financial problems which resulted in my training being locked until payments were back up to date, this in turn reduced the 3 years time line...I have had a long period of not doing any training because my financial problems were resulting in me facing eviction. My agreement with the finance division has been passed to a debt collector. My query is that, surely if the finance department are treating it as a full loan that I have to repay, then they have paid the whole amount to the training department. So my account should never have been locked and the financial side of it should have been treated exactly like that. However I am being asked to pay back the full amount, even though my account has been locked for at least a year over the whole course of time. After contacting T2G today, I have been told that my course is due to finish in February 2018, so I am being asked to pay for a course that I am going to be unable to even attempt to complete.
×
×
  • Create New...