It seems that many people are not aware of section 75(A) of the CCA which covers purchases made using a credit card where the goods cost between £30K and £60K. It appears that this bit of legislation has only been added recently.

Hi, Looking for help regarding Everest conservatory sale procedure when the point of sale is on customer premises. We have a long running dispute with Everest going back to 2014, when we were mis-sold a conservatory. We clearly asked the salesman for a specific type of foundation and base work, but as his sales tool was unable to specifically detail the type of foundations being requested, we made certain it was written on to the sales contract. To set the picture, the contract was signed very late on a Thursday night, and the salesman used an excuse that he couldn’t take our deposit money and consequently said he was unable to leave the signed sales document or the technical sales agreement with us. [yes, we now know this was breach of the consumer regulations act] We paid the deposit to the head-office the following week. What has happened since, Everest has used a different foundation (plus delivered lots of other problems) and since we don’t have a copy of the sales contract we are finding it difficult to prove our request with Everest. Everest have provided copies of the technical sales agreement, but their system was not configured to state what type of piling was requested, so Everest are claiming they have provided what was stated on the sales agreement. As instructed by Consumer advice/Trading standards we have asked for a copy of the sales contract under the Consumer Regulations Act, yet they only send repeated copies of the technical sales agreement stating that it is the binding contract. And per Consumer Advice, we have now also requested a Subject Access Request per the data protection act again specifically asking for the sales contract plus any other documentation with our details on them. We doubt Everest ware going to share a copy of the sales contract unless we can show them an example Everest conservatory sales contract, and demand they provide our copy. Can anyone share a copy of their sales contract? I’m not after your specifics but just what does the Everest Conservatory sales contract look like, because we cannot remember. Alternatively, anyone out there who has a copy of their Everest conservatory technical sales agreement, where it specifies Shire piling or Helix piling and/or a Quikbase base solution? It doesn’t need to be a contract in dispute, this can be any one that has been successfully installed and the customer is happy with it, either will do. Many thanks in advance, if you can help.

Full story and photos :- http://www.msn.com/en-gb/lifestyle/family-relationships/womans-act-of-kindness-for-blind-cubs-fan-goes-viral/ar-BBCE6eH?li=AA9SkIr&ocid=ientp

In May 2018 the new General Data Protection Regulation will come into force. This is an EU wide regulation and although the UK will be leaving the EU, these new regulations will be implemented. http://tinyurl.com/zqfmm48 The above linkis from the ICO goes into some detail but it isn't very clear as yet. The one major change to consumers is the removal of the £10 fee although companies can charge for extra searches. I'm not 100% sure that the removal of fees relates to medical records as yet. If the NHS cannot charge the usual £50, that will be a big bonus. http://tinyurl.com/zrg22z4

If you purchased for instance vehicle prior to the above act being implement and the vehicle required a repair after the Act came into force i.e. December 2015 and the workmanship on the repair was very poor and the fault is still there, are you entitled to request a full refund of the repair within 30 day as it is a new purchase?

If you purchase an item and you have issues with it within the first 14 days and opt for a repair and then the same item breaks down again with the identical faults 4 months later are you as the consumer entitled to request a full refund as it has already had a repair for same faults? Which.co.uk seems to confirm that a full refund should be forthcoming. If yes, can someone point me to the actual legislation? Thanks.

Hi, I made a claim against a bank for some charges which had been applied to my mortgage account for the 'cleansing' by their solicitors of my Data following a DSAR in 2008. The finite detail of which is not relevant to this question I pose. The bank employed solicitors to defend my Claim (which I had repaid in full after a battle). 1) The solicitors advised me that the bank had admitted the charges should not have been applied ie. there was a mistake or the fact I was never advised of these charges, they were 'concealed.' However, the solicitors stated on a number of occasions when I pressed them that my 2008 charges which had been charged were now Time Barred and therefore would not be repaid citing s.2 Limitations Act 1980. - (6yrs rule) 2) I only discovered the charges in 2014 when investigating something else and they knew this. However, I went back to them and stated that under s.32 of the Limitations Act 1980 in the event of Mistake, Concealment or Fraud, Limitation is postponed, but they insisted s.2 applied as a result of my claim being a claim against the bank for breaching the DPA. They stated in response: "You have proposed an action against our client for a breach of the Data Protection Act 1998 and on that basis s.2 Limitations Act 1980 applies" So my question to you here is: Under what circumstances, when a claim is made for a breach in the Data Protection Act (they charged me over £1000 for a £10 statutory DSAR fee cost which breached the DPA regulations of charges for a DSAR) can a defence of s.2 Limitations Act apply which denies me the repayment, when s.32 can be ignored which entitles me to be repaid? I received the payments back on the basis of a 'commercial decision' being made (ie..it was costing them more in their own legal fees now that I had redeemed the mortgage and couldn't dump them on my mtg, than they were going to pay out) But that's not the issue here, I need to know exactly why they felt they could use s.2 legally to defend and not repay me, whilst ignoring s.32? To the layman it doesn't make sense, perhaps there is a particular legal reason why and that's what I need to know. Many thanks A1

Afternoon one and all. Hope you're all doing well? I was hoping that someone might be able to advice me of something just milling around my head. On the 7th of April, I found a car on Gumtree and entered into a conversation with the seller. After a while, my gut instinct was literally going ten to a dozen because the seller said that he wanted to sell the car to me using a third party, gullible as I am, I researched the said third party which was Reedy's Trading Group. I did quite a bit of research on Reedy's Trading Group and found many a website that verified that they were real. Even on their website and the back end they had Gumtree accredited within their SEO. I proceeded with the sale doing a bank transfer for £2779.00, Yes, I know, what a idiot. Turns out that Reedy's never existed, they had cloned all of these websites and created reviews. I got in contact with Gumtree to report the seller after reporting the fraud to Action Fraud for all the good its done. I work as a user experience designer and I wanted to ascertain exactly how Gumtree verify who is real and who isn't? I contacted Robert Hatterley who is the CEO of both Gumtree and Ebay UK and the only reply that I kept on getting was that how Gumtree are a classified add and they have a dedicated Fraud team... This is where I need the advice. 48 hours after the [problem], another company cropped up on Gumtree selling 15 cars, the name of the seller was Reedy Trade. I created a dummy account and these people sent through pretty much identical to how I was [problem]med before. I have reported this to Gumtree, 72 hours later, I checked and the seller is still there. If Gumtree is quoting itself saying that it prides itself on how it tackles Fraud and they have a dedicated team, yet in 48 hours I have managed to prove that the fraudsters are still trading on Gumtree, would I be able to claim damages back under the Misrepresentation Act of 1967? Because they are claiming that they are being vigilant, yet this isn't the case? Thanks in Advance Cole:|

Long story short. Around April last year I bought a guest bed for the spare room. The bed has only been used about 10 times as it's a guest bed, however the frame has broken and is fairly unusable as a bed. I've contacted Halifax to raise a S75 claim, however they are saying as I do not have the receipt to prove I purchased the bed, I am unable to make the claim, even though I have provided them with a statement showing the purchase. The bed cost £199. The store I bought the bed from went out of business late last year, so I have been unable to contact them. Do I need the original receipt to make a claim?

Hello All, I had a Beko Fridge Freezer delivered on 18th February and as advised, left it for 8 hours before switching on. On turning it on, there were strange sounds, some clicking and loud screeching sound, a bit like a cat being strangled. I called Currys and was asked to talk to Beko, which I did. I was told this could be due to gases in the system and that I ought to wait a few weeks. It is now coming up to a month and the noise has not stopped. I asked for a Beko engineer, who came out today and said this was not faulty but the sounds were something found in the frost free type fridge freezers. While he acknowledged that it was problem, said nothing could be done as it is not listed as a fault. I have called Currys to say that under the Sale of Goods act I wish to return the item. The have replied that it is now a used item and also as they cannot power the fridges in-store , the noise is not their responsibility. Any suggestions would be most appreciated. Thank you.

Avoid parcel2go Ltd terrible company, paid for next day delivery service, took 20 days to delivery. If you try and leave a review on Trust Pilot they report it, even though I have proof. Having to take legal action against them now, already gone to my bank to start chargeback, and starting court case http://www.moneyclaim.gov.uk If anyone else is having same problem, and interested in class action, please let me know.

Hi Guys, Need your advice on this unusual problem. Sorry story is a bit long. I’ll spilt it by bullet point to make it easier to read: 1. 23 Dec 2016 – went to the store made small purchase requested £50 cashback. Was deep in my thoughts. Felt a bit awkward at the end of interaction with cashier who started behaving strangely by completely ignoring me and started chatting with colleague. After packing few purchased items I was waiting patiently not realising what for. Felt as something did not finish - no eye contact from cashier, no thanks / goodbye. I’ve felt a bit strange and waited for much longer that socially acceptable in such situation and then left the store without exchanging a word with cashier. 2. Few day later realised I did not had my cash. As I was not out of the house since visiting store I could not have spent it or lost somewhere. 3. Waited for store to open again and went to speak with manager on 27 Dec 16 to ask them for my cashback and checking CCTV to confirm it was not given. Duty manager said he cannot view CCTV but checked till for that day and there was no extra cash in the till. He also found small receipt with my signature that confirms I’ve received cash. Signature seemed to be mine but I do not remember signing it nor receiving cash. 4. I’ve got my receipt with cashback on it. I am guessing I was asked to sign small slip confirming I was given cash and then was given my store receipt. That triggered me into thinking I got what I needed and made to forget about my cash by cashier starting to completely ignoring me. 5. I’ve spoken to customer services and same manger again who were pointing at each other saying I need to request CCTV footage and pay for it and that only store manager / area manager can view CCTV. 6. 6 Jan 16 spoke to customer services who then spoke to store manager who then checked till records again stating no extra cash was reported on that day. 7. Managed to speak to store manager in person on 6 Jan 16. Did not get much was just fobbed off making it sound it was my fault and I should have checked cash in store and they conducted their investigation. This person was quite elusive did not wanted to talk. Said nothing I can do. Both managers felt a bit arrogant almost as if they were saying good luck with that! If you know what I mean. 8. 6 Jan 16 stated electronic communication with customer services sending all above information via web form. Starting message with I am making formal request for CCTV footage under Data Protection Act 1998 confirming I am happy to pay for it. Providing all relevant details timing till number etc. 9. 18 Jan 17 sent them all above information in registered letter. 10. Did not get any response for around 10 calendar days and called them again to chase up for reply. 11. Received reply on evening of 20 Jan 17 (Friday) stating they passed for investigation to area manager. Provided instructions for requesting CCTV and how payment should be made. Advised that I need to contact police if I felt there was theft. 12. 20 Jan 17 I replied via e-mail and asked to place hold on the footage to ensure it is not overwritten as I’ve read somewhere that their retention period is 30 days. 13. 21 Jan 17 (Saturday) send request for footage as per their instructions. 14. 26 Jan 17 received letter stating request is outside of system storage capacity. 15. Chased them up for finial outcome of area manager investigation knowing what they will say. 16. 16 Feb 2016 Received response stating CCTV has now been overwritten they conducted till review and no extra cash was found. Nothing else they can do and I can contact the police. My view on that is that they ignored my initial request under Data protection act sent to them on 6 Jan 17. Purposely delayed providing instruction for requesting footage and timed it so that I have 0% chances of making it successfully and that it reaches them before 30 days retention period to cover up for their employees. I’ve seem to exhausted my option to get this resolved with the company and looking for advice on taking this further. I feel up to taking them to small court claiming for postage, petrol cost for number of trips inconvenience and original cashback. Just wanted to get your views on chance for success and some help with small court procedures if will be going that way. Thanks for reading!

Dear all, I unfortunately suffer from chronic depressive illness and have done so for many years with the condition significantly worsening over the past few years. In the year 2011 I had been subject to police investigation. I attended a police interview on a voluntary basis. Due to my debilitating depression I had an appropriate adult also attend this interview who I understand was a social worker at that time. The social worker, without my explicit consent, went on to record the details of the alleged criminal charges I faced on the NHS Trust’s IT system and within my electronic patient records. This information is categorised as highly sensitive information as defined under section 2 (h) of the Data Protection Act and the Trust seemingly recorded this information unlawfully. Their response however is that the processing of this information was 'necessary for medical purposes'. The criminal matter has been long since disposed of in my favour however the Trust are continuously processing this information wherever and whenever possible. I am not clear on whether or not explicit consent was needed here. It seems to me it was. I should be most grateful for any input.

Supply start date Feb 2014 Dispute raised March 2014 based on start of contract meter reading and inaccurate bill. September 2014 Court date set for warrant application and stated to court the warrant process was being misused and the account was in dispute warrant declined as there was no need to attend my meter for any works or service. After the declined warrant application I agreed to have smart meters fitted and debt would be refreshed due to inaccuracy on contract start date. Debt has never been wiped as agreed, so account remains in dispute. The engineers came and declared it unsafe to sit a smart meter due to age of current gas meter, they wanted to replace the meter due to age but due to location would need to consult with national grid as walls needed to be knocked through etc etc and pipes re piped. Nothing materialised, I changed my supplier however as I have discovered today only the electric went through. I was unaware that the supplier was still supplying me and assumed I was on a dual fuel tariff with new supplier however it's electric only. I have today been issued with a notice to obtain a warrant due to debt of £3500. Last meter reading was September 2014. Have bot been provided with an accurate bill in this time. The meter still awaits replacement. Any advice on how to proceed? Upon phoning them They are adamant they either need 50 % payment or they will fit a pre payment meter and deduct 20% of every top up for the debt. I'm happy to have a repayment meter however the amount of debt is not correct

Hi, I hope someone can help me with a unique query. I need to get in touch with a particular surgeon that operated on another patient who was admitted to the same ward as me - this is for a very rare and specialist medical issue that I also developed. Unfortunately, I cannot remember the surgeon's name as this was a few years ago, but i should be able to identify the name of the surgeon from a list of names if I received a list of all surgeons operating at that hospital during the time when I was admitted there. Is this something I could ask using the Freedom Of Information Act, or would the names of surgeons not be provided? Thank you.

My wife purchased a Logik TV from PCW 31/08/2016 for £79-99. Yesterday 13/01/2017 there was a "pop" and the TV no longer switched on - browsing the internet I find it is a common fault with Logik TV for the power supply or motherboard to fail in this way. Visitng PCW in Coventry I was told I HAD to allow them to repair the TV and COULD NOT ask for a refund on the grounds the TV was "not fit for purpose". Their policy is that they MUST attempt a repair . Is this true that under the SOGA I HAVE to allow them to try a repair before I am allowed a refund. I remember once reading that after you had allowed a repair you were no longer allowed to ask for a refund. Can anybody enlighten me as to what action I am allowed and whether I HAVE to allow PCW to repair a TV I have now lost all confidence in.

Any help would be appreciated. I am trying to establish whether my solicitor has acted negligent by not following the pre-action protocol in respect of a Disrepair claim which has now been settled, after 6 years of my local council denying liability under the OLA 1957. I had an accident during the period where liability was being disputed but my solicitor is claiming that he did not have the funds to pursue a PI claim but never advised me on this, and on checking the pre action protocol under Disrepair claim there is reference that would suggest that in any event, a claim for PI arising from a Disrepair claim could and probably should have been made by a qualified legal representative as the Disrepair procedure makes reference to a PI claim if an injury has occurred because of the disrepair, in this case a out-house flooded everytime it rained.

The following statement was released a few days ago by the Government. This is in response to a Daily Mail campaign earlier this year regarding individuals who have found themselves unable to get a mortgage or credit because of the existence of a judgment against them that they were unaware of (usually because all correspondence had been sent to a previous address). Depending on the outcome, this consultation could have far reaching consequences for bailiff enforcement. Currently, in relation to council tax arrears, a local authority are permitted to issue a summons to the 'last known' address. In relation to an unpaid penalty charge notice, correspondence must be addressed to the address held by DVLA at the time of the contravention.

I'll try and keep this to bare facts, given that if I try and explain it fully I will struggle. I have multiple medical conditions, mix of mental and physical. I have suffered some problems in the local area - threats, thefts, vandalism etc My health has deteriorated to the point I don't go out, or have contact with people, ever. I want to move, new start, somewhere else - to a different area completely. Medical professionals agree that a move is good and support it. I can't join housing lists, afford to buy or even travel alone to look at private rental. If I did even attempt private rent, I may not be able to look after the property properly. There is no mechanism for me to join, transfer or swap to a different area (aside from mutual exchange, which isn't getting anywhere) Went to council for advice, given some help and social worker. Council attitude goes from "yes we will help" to "it's not our problem" in the space of a week Their reason is that because I don't want to stay in this area, they don't have to do anything. Council refuses to even make a referral to the one housing association I could register with (it provides supported/sheltered accommodation but requires a social worker referral). I can provide more details if necessary! My question is twofold. I know the care act says the council are supposed to take into account housing and preventing deterioration. How far does that apply? Especially given that I have medical support for moving. Can they really just leave me here until I don't know what happens? Secondly, is there a housing option I have missed? I have tried CAB, SHELTER, MIND, MPs, councils, housing associations and everyone else I can think of. I can't afford to buy even a shared ownership or attempt the HOLD scheme. I'm so far past the end of my tether in this situation I can't even see it behind me

Hi, recently I hired a hot tub from a company online who delivered it for a week of hire and put up a small, open sided gazebo around the tub and secured it in place. I hadn't yet moved or touched the gazebo. The first day was OK, on the second day, I came home from work, and the gazebo had broken free of it's secure fixings and ended up on my lawn. The frame was in a bad shape and clearly could not be used again. I informed the "company" (by all accounts it's just one person) and told them exactly what happened. His response was that I should be charged for it. I still have the hot tub at my house and have just requested a copy of my Ts and Cs (which we didn't get after we had signed and paid the money for). But just from a legal point of view, who has the stronger case?

Me and my partner booked tickets online to see Fantastic Beasts and where to Find them. On the Odeon Guildford website it stated that the 8pm viewing was subtitled. (We are both deaf and need subtitles to follow a film) We turned up on the night of the screening, 18th November 2016. I always check before we go into the screening that it is actually subtitled as in the past we go, only to be told there are no subtitles. I ask the staff, is the film at 8pm subtitled? He goes on to say no. I ask why? He avoids the question a number of times. I ask him again, and ask 'why not add the subtitles?' Its really is not difficult to do- (popular films delivered to cinemas USUALLY contain a subtitle track. Cinemas can switch this subtitle track on or off, like a DVD player or Sky box, BUT cinemas prefer to SCHEDULE subtitled shows in advance, so everyone knows a particular show is subtitled.) I ask him again, and the guy says 'people don't like subtitles.' I was upset and angry by this point, and I said I'd like to speak to the manager. He then says he IS the manager. I was even more shocked as this came out of the words of the manager. He could have been a bit more tactful. It clearly breaches the Equality Act. The subtitles weren't cancelled due to technical failure but because they decided to discriminate against a minority, whilst pleasing the larger minority (the hearing people) after specifically advertising the film as being accessible for that minority. It was an evening trip wasted, we planned in advance only to be hugely disappointed. We were refunded, and given two free cinema tickets and an apology, but that is not good enough. It was an injury and insult to our feelings, to be turned away just because we are deaf. Hearing people have the privilege of turning up to watch films when they like. Deaf people have restrictions - we can only see films that are shown subtitled. We've suffered as a consequence on the basis of characteristic (disability) which is protected under the equality act 2010. I have tweeted this, emailed the cinema, and am awaiting a response. I hope they don't get off lightly, I will make sure of that. I have proof of booking confirmation when I booked my tickets, which also shows the proof of it being captioned. But no proof unfortunately of the manager saying 'people don't like the subtitles.' I do though, have a witness. I am new to this forum, and so hi to everyone I am not sure what else to do, feel at a bit of a loose end and would appreciate some help and guidance on what to do next. Many thanks.

Specifically relating to personal correspondence. Work program provider wants me to bring a list of agencies I am registered with along with phone numbers and ring them while they listen and or record the conversation. Am I right that without my permission that is an unreasonable request and I can tell them to do one ?

I made a Freedom of Information request to my council because it smells bad near of my council library. I was dissatisfied with the result and I made a request for an Internal Review of the handling of my FOI request. Unfortunately the council told me that it has no obligation to reply to this request for an Internal Review because it has considered my Freedom of Information Request under the Environmental Information Regulation Act 2004 and under Regulation 11 of this act a request for Internal Review should be made within 40 working days of the last correspondences of the council concerning my Freedom of Information request and I have made my request 50 working days after the last correspondence. I made my request for an Internal Review 50 working days after the last correspondence of the council because I was not aware that my FOI request was considered under the Environmental Information Regulation Act 2004 and that there is a 40 working days deadline. 1. In the email that I received from the council acknowledging receipt of my Freedom of Information Request and giving me a reference number it is stated that my request will be considered under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 but it is not stated that it will be considered also under the Environmental Information Regulations Act 2004 because in the acknowledgement email of the council it is stated the following: “I am responding to your request under the Freedom of lnformation Act 2000, which we received on 10 May 2016, for information held by the Council” However I have found in the Internet that contrary to my council when other councils acknowledge a Freedom of Information request and consider it under the Environmental Information Regulation Act 2004 they inform the applicant of this fact because I find the following in the Internet “Thank you for your request for information regarding the conservation area in Parkgate, which we received on 07 October 2015. We are dealing with your request under the Environmental Information Regulations 2004” Therefore the council did not inform me that it will consider my FOI request under the Environmental Information Regulation Act 2004. I would like to know if it is at the time that the council receives a FOI request that it has to decide whether or not to treat it as environmental information request and it has a legal duty to inform the applicant of its decision in its acknowledgment email? I learnt it only because I made a request for an Internal Review. 2. The only deadline to which the council makes reference in its emails is that he will reply to my FOI within 20 workings days but no reference is made to a 40 working days deadline. Contrary to other councils in the website of my council it is not made any reference to this 40 working days deadline In none of the emails that I received from the council about my Freedom of Information request it is made reference to the Environmental Information Regulation Act 2004 and to this 40 working days deadline. Nowhere in the complaint form for Internal Review it is made reference to this 40 working days deadline In the last email that I received from the council about my Freedom of Information request the council advises me that I can make a request for an Internal Review of the handling of my Freedom of Information request but the council did not advise me to do this within 40 working days. I would like to know if because it has made reference to a deadline of 20 working days the council had a duty to make reference to all deadlines including the 40 working days deadline? 3. I would like to know if the fact that the council does not say in its acknowledgement email and in none of its correspondences that my FOI request is considered under the Environment Information Regulations Act 2004 means that the council did not consider it under this act and has changed its mind later when I made my request for Internal Review to use as an excuse the 40 days deadline to refuse me this request because it is too embarrassing? 4. I would like to know if the 40 days deadline starts when I was aware that I my FOI request was considered under the Environmental Information Regulation Act 2004 i.e. when I was told that my request for Internal Review was refused? For the reason that paragraph 2 of this act says “Representations under paragraph (1) shall be made in writing to the public authority no later than 40 working days after the date on which the applicant believes that the public authority has failed to comply with the requirement” 5. I made my request for an Internal Review of the handling of my FOI request only few days after the 40 working days deadline, In this circumstance I would like to know if I can advise the council to accept to process my request for Internal Review and to amend its website and to inform properly the applicant in case his Freedom of Information Request is considered under the Environmental Information Regulation Act 2004 and that there is an important 40 working days deadline I have read the Environment Information Regulations Act 2004 and I found out that according to Regulation 14 of this Act in case the council refuses to provide the information requested under the FOI request the council has a duty to inform the claimant that he has the right to complain against this refusal within 40 working days under Regulation 11 of this Act. Regulation 14 of the EIR 2004 states: "14.—(1) If a request for environmental information is refused by a public authority under regulations 12(1) or 13(1), the refusal shall be made in writing and comply with the following provisions of this regulation (5) The refusal shall inform the applicant— (a)that he may make representations to the public authority under regulation 11; and (b)of the enforcement and appeal provisions of the Act applied by regulation 18." Regulation 11 of the EIR 2004 states: ["11.—(1) Subject to paragraph (2), an applicant may make representations to a public authority in relation to the applicant’s request for environmental information if it appears to the applicant that the authority has failed to comply with a requirement of these Regulations in relation to the request. (2) Representations under paragraph (1) shall be made in writing to the public authority no later than 40 working days after the date on which the applicant believes that the public authority has failed to comply with the requirement." However I have not found in this Act that it is stated that in case the council accepts to provide the information request but the claimant is not satisfied with the information provided or with the handling of his FOI request the council has also the duty to inform him that he has the right to complain within 40 working days under Regulation 11 of this Act. I have not found also in this act that it is stated that when the council decides to consider a FOI request under the Environment Information Regulations Act 2004 it has a duty to inform the claimant I have maybe not properly read the Environment Information Regulations Act 2004. Therefore I would like to know if some of you know where it is made reference to these two important requirements in this Act or in another piece of legislation. I think that somewhere it should made reference to these two requirements because for example it would be unfair to deal with a FOI request under the Environment Information Regulations Act 2004 without the claimant being aware of this fact and without being aware that if he wants to make a request for an Internal Review he should do this without 40 working days. I need this information to convince the council to accept my request for Internal Review without the need to make a complaint to the Information Commissioner

I have just seen a RBS agreement from 1992!! At the top it does'nt have the usual bumf of 'this is a Credit agreement regulated under the consumer credit Act 1974' (or similar) I thought this was a must! What legal implications does it have? There are other faults but I can't remember what not having the above means. Its not mine so I can't post it up. Kind Regards jack

The Consumer Rights Act (CRA) will apply in full to all transport services, including mainline rail passenger services, from next month, allowing passengers to challenge the amount of compensation they are offered by rail companies. From the start of next month, under the Consumer Rights Act, passengers will be able to ask for their money back by going to a local county court if they are not happy with the way a rail operator has dealt with their request for compensation. Long-suffering commuters will also be allowed to demand that compensation is paid in cash rather than train vouchers. Under existing guidelines most train operators only offer a ‘delay repay’ deal which allows passengers to claim the cost of half a single journey for delays of more than half an hour – or the full one-way ticket price if held up for over an hour. It is only if a train is cancelled, or a vital connection missed, that a full refund of a return journey will be paid. These refunds are not automatic – you must fill in a form first – and they are currently paid in train journey vouchers. The new rules will allow passengers to demand all their money back if they believe the compensation offered is inadequate – or they believe they deserve a full refund as the service fell well short of what they had expected. Read more: http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-3783016/Delayed-leaves-line-train-company-court.html#ixzz4KtQ6t3ff