Hi there, first post so I hope it makes sense... Can anyone give me a brief understanding of section 15 of the Equality Act 2010 please (in layman's terms) as I'm trying to help my sister with a work problem and I think it might be relevant. She is a member of a union but they haven't been much help! It's relating to an actionable attendance policy at her work. She is disabled under the definition of the act and is employed by a large public sector organisation. She is rarely off work except with disability-related sickness (this has happened 6 times in the 24 years she has worked for them) and when she is it always lasts a few months and therefore breaches the policy guidelines, even though they relax the rules slightly for disabled employees. i.e. in one year Policy - 3 periods or 8 days Disabled employees usually 4 periods or 11 days She has been in work for 22 months without any sickness but then was taken ill and has been off for eight weeks and is due back at the end of March on a return to work plan (reduced hours for five weeks and weekly management meetings). She went to a sickness meeting last week and was told in passing that they will not put up with this level of sickness anymore and mentioned capability. She always takes personal responsibility for her health, takes her meds, lets manager know if a problem is developing, goes to the doctors/counselling etc. My question is that because of her disability when she is of sick she has always broken the actionable attendance policy which puts her at risk of being dismissed. Would it be reasonable to ask that her attendance be ignored under section 15? Just as an aside she has been off with depression and anxiety caused by work related stress. Any help would be much appreciated. Thanks Dex

I haven't had time to read this yet, but think it's of relevance to this forum and nolegion's sterling work. http://www.cqc.org.uk/content/using-hidden-cameras-monitor-care HB

Dates and times changed in case company or person see's thread.... Advice or Guidance.... Third party employee, ( Agency Employee ) Made verbal and threatening attack on myself, I won't write the exact wordings here, this was very scary and intimidating at the time, due to the aggression and tone shown, threats of violence made at the time and for after work, This happened twice within five minutes of each other, as person went away and returned for second bout of threats ( this time he had time to think of his actions so was premeditated ) ( Witnessed by another colleague ) Reported incident straight away to line manager, who instantly took the guy off the floor, and person was escorted off site, myself and witness made statements, feed back was person suspended pending investigation, Week later informed person was not to be allowed back onto site.. . Fair enough incident dealt with in house.. . Week later informed person was to return on another shift and department... My company could not Enforce disciplinary procedure, and that the agency had performed their own investigation, I expressed I did not want the person to return, ( verbally ) Person now returned on another shift and department, I am now off work ( very short period so far ) as do not want to bump into this guy, company states our paths will not cross, but can not guarantee such. Contacted my union explained everything that happened, they have advised I make a grievance to the company under the grounds of duty of care and report the incident to the police ( which I have, and the police have classed the incident as a hate crime, awaiting feed back from police ). I want to return to work but unsure whether the company will safe guard my well being fully. And should I return and the guy approaches me again, will the company become fully responsible for any further threats or verbal abuse. I have been informed that my short absence will not come under the normal absence procedure, and that my lost earnings will be protected due to the absence being a work place incident. I have found lots of information relating to such incidents, and will be writing my grievance to the company some time today, any thoughts on this matter would be really appreciated. Thanks

Hi, below i have paste information from the Scottish gov. website. If you are thinking of defending a repossession procedure and that you are not able to get legal aid, you cant afford a solicitors, you can get a Lay Representation to speak on your behalf. You can contact the Scottish Shelter to help you. At the moment i am at the early stage with my bank, they are threathening me with calling up notice if i dont pay up debt over £200,000.00 ( 3 accounts ) two account they cannot produce credit agreement documents. This dispute being going on for 6 years. Home Owner and Debtor Protection (Scotland) Act 2010: Guidance on Lay Representation Introduction/Background 1. This guidance relates specifically to section 24E of the Conveyancing and Feudal Reform (Scotland) Act 1970 (the 1970 Act) and section 5F of the Heritable Securities (Scotland) Act 1894 (the 1894 Act), as introduced by the Home Owner and Debtor Protection (Scotland) Act 2010 ("the 2010 Act"), and the Lay Representation in Proceedings relating to Residential Property (Scotland) Order 2010 (the Order), which allow for the lay representation of home owners and entitled residents in court proceedings for possession of residential property (including recall proceedings). 2. In early 2009, in response to the economic downturn and consequent rise in repossessions, the Scottish Government convened a Repossessions Group, as a sub-group of the Debt Action Forum, to consider whether protection for Scottish home owners facing repossession was sufficient. Members of the Group represented a wide range of interested parties, including representatives from the Council of Mortgage Lenders, the Finance and Leasing Association, the Scottish Law Commission, Shelter, Citizens Advice Scotland and the Scottish Legal Aid Board. The Group made a number of recommendations to strengthen protection for home owners, which were taken forward through Part 1 of the Home Owner and Debtor Protection (Scotland) Act 2010, to: require all repossession cases to call in court; require lenders to demonstrate to the court that they have considered reasonable alternatives to repossession; and enable home owners to be represented in court by approved lay representatives. 3. Paragraphs 5.3 to 5.14 of the Repossessions Group Final Report, published in June 2009, recognised that the repossessions process, in particular a court appearance, can be intimidating for home owners faced with repossession. The Group acknowledged that there was a need to improve arrangements for assisting those individuals affected by the formal procedures, including better access to information, but also better access to the full range of appropriate advice and representation providers. It was felt by the Group that there were particular issues about enabling access to representation, and that the existing restrictions on rights of audience exacerbated problems. Individuals who did not qualify for legal aid and could not afford to instruct a solicitor were faced with the prospect of appearing at court as an unrepresented litigant. The Group recognised that non-solicitor advisers were limited in what they could do in such cases, and identified that it would be helpful if experienced providers of lay advice and representation, where appropriate, were allowed to play a larger role in helping unrepresented litigants in the court process. 4. To tackle these issues, the Group recommended that there should be statutory change to enable home owners to have the option of being represented in court by approved lay representatives as well as solicitors. This would make the court process more accessible and encourage more people to take advantage of the legal protection on offer. 5. Section 24E(1) of 1970 Act and section 5F(1) of 1894 Act allow for the debtor or entitled resident to be represented by an approved lay representative in court proceedings in relation to a creditor's application to exercise the remedies available on default by the debtor in respect of a security over residential property, including repossession, (extending to recall proceedings under sections 24D and 5E respectively of those Acts), except in the circumstances which are prescribed by Scottish Ministers. 6. Secondary legislation prescribes those persons and bodies which may approve lay representatives. Those individuals approved as lay representatives will be required to satisfy the Sheriff throughout the proceedings that they are a suitable person to represent the debtor or entitled resident and that they are authorised to do so by that individual. 7. The provisions introduced by the 2010 Act essentially introduce rights of audience for approved lay representatives to defend proceedings related to applications for creditors' remedies on default, including repossession. It should be noted that the Act does not confer an automatic right on debtors and entitled residents to such representation, nor does it mean that an approved lay representative is obliged to participate in all proceedings. Nor can an approved lay representative act for a creditor. 8. This guidance is primarily directed towards those persons or bodies who are prescribed for the purpose of approving lay representatives, but is also relevant for approved lay representatives. The guidance explains the role of a lay representative and the competences expected of an approved lay representative. It is intended to aid prescribed persons or bodies in approving lay representatives. 9. The guidance sets out advice on how prescribed persons or bodies should approach the approval process, and importantly how organisations should seek to manage the provision of lay representation so that the individual client receives appropriate assistance from the appropriate adviser. This may in some instances mean that it is more appropriate for the individual to receive assistance from a solicitor than from a lay representative due to the complexity or the type of case that is involved. What is a Lay Representative 10. Section 24E(3) of the Conveyancing and Feudal Reform (Scotland) Act 1970 , and 5F(3) of the Heritable Securities (Scotland) Act 1894 define a lay representative as an individual, other than an advocate or a solicitor, approved for the purposes of that section by a person or body prescribed, or of a description prescribed by the Scottish Ministers. That definition is filled out by Article 3 of the Order, as set out in paragraph 20 below. The Role of a Lay Representative 11. Previously, in repossession proceedings, there was a limit to what non-solicitor advisors could do. The only individuals with rights of audience to represent and participate in the proceedings were solicitors or advocates. The provisions introduced by the 2010 Act mean that lay representatives also have these rights of audience, so that any debtor or entitled resident involved in these proceedings can have a lay representative acting for them if they so choose. However, prescribed persons or bodies should ensure that approved lay representatives are clear about the extent to which they can and should be acting in any specific case or circumstance. Lay representatives should be clear about the point at which they are not competent to deal with a specific case or a particular aspect or legal process, and should refer cases where appropriate to a solicitor who is skilled and knowledgeable in this area, or to another lay representative with the relevant skills and knowledge either in their organisation or another advice agency. It is expected that lay representatives will not normally charge for their services. 12. Standard 4.3 in Section 1 of the Standards, refers to referral arrangements. It is recommended that approved bodies, whether accredited or not, adopt arrangements such as are envisaged by this standard. If in the opinion of the lay representative the circumstances are such that the individual would benefit from legal advice, they lay representative should consider referring the individual to a solicitor and remind the individual that they may be eligible for legal aid. The lay representative should therefore be familiar with the financial eligibility requirements 1 of legal aid. 13. The legislation defines the term "lay representative" for repossession proceedings, with a view to both protecting the debtor or entitled resident, and to ensuring that court business proceeds smoothly. Only individuals who have the appropriate skills and knowledge to understand the proceedings and to represent individuals effectively may be approved to act as lay representatives. Someone who does not understand the relevant court proceedings or legislation is not equipped to be able to represent the interests of debtors and entitled residents properly in court. 14. Other people such as a friend, spouse or colleague can in some instances attend court proceedings to support individuals but this is distinct from the active role of the statutorily defined lay representative, and they will not have the right to participate in repossession proceedings on behalf of the individual. Satisfying the Sherriff that you are competent to be a lay representative and authorised to do so. 15. Section 24E(2) of the Conveyancing and Feudal Reform (Scotland) Act 1970, and 5F(2) of the Heritable Securities (Scotland) Act 1894 require that an approved lay representative must throughout the proceedings satisfy the Sheriff that: he or she is a suitable person to represent the debtor or entitled resident; and he or she is authorised by the debtor or entitled resident to do so 16. In line with this requirement an approved lay representative will need to be prepared to demonstrate to the Sheriff that they are competent and authorised to appear before the Court as a lay representative. Approving organisations are encouraged to provide their local courts with a list of persons approved by them to act as lay representatives along with letters of confirmation of approval that individual lay representatives can show the Sheriff if required. This should be done in advance of any hearing in order to inform the Sheriff that such individuals are competent to appear in court. 17. It is strongly recommended that approved lay representatives also obtain written confirmation that they are authorised by the debtor or entitled resident to act on their behalf, which can similarly be provided as documentary evidence for the Sheriff if required. 18. Prescribed bodies or persons approving lay representatives should ensure that those individuals approved to act as a lay representative are aware that the Sheriff is responsible for ensuring efficient use of court time. This means if the Sheriff considers that the lay representative is not a suitable person to act on behalf of the debtor or entitled resident, and therefore that it is not in their interests for this person to continue to represent them, then the Sheriff may discharge the lay representative and they would no longer be able to take part in the hearing. 19. Such discharge and any resulting postponement of the proceedings would be extremely inconvenient for all concerned and the costs involved with postponing are likely to fall on the debtor. It is therefore important that approving organisations ensure that all lay representatives approved meet the criteria to demonstrate that they are competent. Prescribed persons or bodies for the purposes of approving lay representatives 20. Individuals can act as lay representatives so long as they are approved as such in accordance with the legislation, and are not barred from acting by virtue of article 12 or 13 of the Order (e.g. as a result of inadequate performance). Article 3 of the Order prescribes those persons or bodies which have the power to approve individuals to undertake lay representation. These are: Organisations with a current entry on the register of advice organisations established and maintained by the Scottish Legal Aid Board; Organisations which have been awarded accreditation at Type III level against the Scottish National Standards for Information and Advice Providers; Local Authorities; and Citizens advice bureaux which are full members of the Scottish Association of Citizens Advice Bureaux - Citizens Advice Scotland. 21. To ensure consistency and high standards, however, it is recommended that all prescribed persons or bodies pay close attention to the Scottish National Standards for Information and Advice Providers, when approving individuals as lay representatives. Scottish National Standards for Information and Advice Providers 22. The Scottish National Standards for Information and Advice Providers (hereafter referred to as 'the Standards') were compiled by the Scottish Government with the assistance of advice providers in the voluntary and statutory sectors. 23. The Standards are a framework for the development of effective and efficient services and were compiled in recognition of the fact that people choose to access information and advice from various s sources. 24. The Standards framework can be used by any advice provider to improve the quality of its advice service. The standards can be found here: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2009/10/05112820/02 25. The Standards distinguish between three principal types of advice giving and intervention. These are: Type I - Active information, sign-posting and explanation; Type II - Casework; and Type III - Advocacy, representation and mediation at court or tribunal level. 26. There is a more detailed explanation of the Types given in the Standards manual. 27. The Scottish Government specifically directs prescribed bodies to certain standards within the Scottish National Standards for Information and Advice Providers for the purpose of this guidance, both in respect of organisational standards as well as those which relate to competencies of individuals. Procedure for approval of lay representatives 28. An individual wishing to act as a lay representative will require to make an application to the approving organisation. A person will not be able to make an application to an approving organisation if they have made an application to another organisation which has yet to be determined. 29. The consideration of an application by the approving organisations must have regard to the interests of persons who might seek to be represented by an approved lay representative. 30. The approving organisation's consideration of an application must also involve an assessment of the applicant's: (a) Knowledge and understanding of: (i)) Scottish legislation and common law in so far as they relate to housing and repossession and (ii) Court procedures and rules, specifically in relation to summary applications in the Sheriff Court (b) Competence at constructing and stating a case both orally and in writing © Advocacy skills, in particular in support and representation 31. The key competences that approved organisations will wish to take into account when assessing an individual's suitability for the role of lay representative are set out in more detail in paragraphs 42-51 below. The approving organisation must also obtain an undertaking that the applicant if approved to act as a lay representative will not act as a lay representative in any situation where this would place the applicant in a situation of conflict of interest, and that the applicant will respect client confidentiality. Training requirements 32. As part of the approval process, the approving organisation may provide an applicant with training in order to assist the lay representative to achieve a satisfactory level of knowledge, understanding, competence and skill in the areas outlined in paragraph 30. 33. Moreover, depending on the competency levels of the applicant, the organisation may need to consider an individual's training needs and arrange or provide training before being able to grant approval. Management and monitoring the performance of approved lay representatives 34. Prescribed persons or bodies have the responsibility of approving lay representatives and it is important that they have systems in place which also set out their own criteria for such approval of individuals. Furthermore such persons or bodies should also have organisational arrangements in place for managing the activity as part of their services. 35. It is recommended that prescribed persons or bodies, whether accredited or not, observe the organisational standards in Section 1 from page 9 of the Standards 3. Close attention should be paid to standards 2.1 - 2.6 4 and 4.1 - 4.7 5 in Section 1 of the Standards, with particular regard to delivering a Type III service on mortgage repossession work. 36. It is advisable that prescribed bodies develop an action plan showing how they intend to manage and deliver the particular elements of service delivery that will be carried out under the lay representation provisions. The organisation will need to be able to relate information about competence, training and supervision of staff to the specific category of circumstance that work will be carried out in. 37. The prescribed persons or bodies should put in place a system for monitoring the performance of individuals approved as lay representatives, paying particular attention to any complaints or concerns about their performance as lay representatives raised by Sheriffs, other court staff or clients, investigating any such complaints thoroughly (see paragraph 59). 38. Prescribed persons or bodies should ensure that approved lay representatives are clear about the extent to which they can and should be acting in any specific case or circumstance. They should be familiar with the financial eligibility requirements of legal aid and remind a debtor where appropriate that they may be able to employ a solicitor through legal aid funding. Lay representatives should also be clear about the point at which they are not competent to deal with a specific case or a particular aspect or legal process, and should refer cases where appropriate to a solicitor who is skilled and knowledgeable in this area, or to another lay representative with the relevant skills and knowledge either in their organisation or another advice agency. Standard 4.3 6 in Section 1 of the Standards, refers to referral arrangements. It is recommended that approved bodies, whether accredited or not, adopt arrangements such as are envisaged by this standard. 39. It is recommended that those persons or bodies with the power to approve lay representatives maintain a definitive list of individuals whom they have approved as lay representatives and review appropriately their performance in this capacity. The approval of each representative must specify the sheriff court districts in which they are expected to act, and it is recommended that the list include that information. This does not limit the number of sheriff court districts in which a lay representative can act but it will be for the approving organisation or body to specify these districts as part of the approval process. 40. It is important that prescribed persons or bodies ensure approved lay representatives are consistently meeting the standards recommended within this guidance. 41. If an individual is not meeting these standards, the prescribed person or body should ensure the individual receives training to improve their performance and should suspend the individual's approval until the person or body is satisfied that they are competent to resume acting as a lay representative. If the person or body remains unsatisfied, they must withdraw their approval. Individual competencies relevant for approval as lay representation 42. It is recommended that in approving lay representatives, prescribed persons or bodies should consider whether individuals are capable of meeting the generic competences for advisers, within the Section 2 Competences for Advisers and Agencies of the Standards. 7 43. Prescribed persons or bodies should note that the competences required for accreditation to Type III - Advocacy, Representation and Mediation level will be particularly relevant for work lay representation . 44. Prescribed persons or bodies should consider whether an individual meets the housing specific knowledge competence for Mortgages/Secured Loans in Section 2 of the Standards. 45. The following key recommended competences are relevant to specific activity that will be undertaken in the court setting. These should be considered in addition to the competences set out within the National Standards, where such competences are not explicitly mentioned in the Standards. Key Recommended Competences of a Lay Representative 46. The key competencies which it is recommended an individual should hold before a prescribed body approves them to act as a lay representative are detailed below. 47. These competencies are considered to be particularly relevant and important when judging the suitability of individuals for the role of lay representative. 48. Has impact and credibility as a representative because: has a good knowledge of subject area, particularly mortgage arrears and repossession procedures used by lenders, FSA regulations and good practice relating to the treatment of customers in arrears, including MCOB 13 8, and consumer credit legislation, and in particular relevant Scottish legislation such as the Heritable Securities (Scotland) Act 1894, the Conveyancing and Feudal Reform (Scotland) Act 1970 and the Home Owner and Debtor Protection (Scotland) Act 2010, and the Applications by Creditors (Pre-Action Requirements) (Scotland) Order 2010. has an ability to make links where appropriate with other relevant areas of law retains objectivity has a good understanding of relevant evidence and presents the above in a structured, coherent and persuasive manner both in writing and orally 49. Undertakes legal research effectively researching relevant legislation, common law and case law, government, regulatory and industry guidance and Codes of Practice, policy statements, etc Understanding the importance of collecting and preserving evidence Discussing all options and their consequences with clients objectively and clearly 50. Understands relevant Court rules, protocols and procedures and basic principles of rules and evidence (e.g. hearsay) understands Sheriff Court procedures and possession procedures, including relevant court notices, application procedures and forms understands the procedure involved in conducting a proof understands the role of officers of the court - i.e. sheriff clerks and appropriate behaviour in court, including the importance of not wasting court time with irrelevant, frivolous or theatrical interventions 51. Use their knowledge, understanding and research to identify arguments, defences and remedial strategies in arrears and repossession actions and present these in a clear manner Identifies arguments which support the client's defence and advise on court orders which it may be appropriate to seek Presents these arguments in a structured, coherent and persuasive manner both in writing and orally Understands post-possession order procedures Challenges negative decisions, actions or legal interpretation which may be adverse to clients Demonstrates an ability to 'think on their feet' in a Court/litigation environment Is prepared to pursue a case to a conclusion where competent to do so and where the client wishes to do so, while at all times clearly explaining the consequences of any action to clients, and seeking to negotiate constructive solutions and arrangements with lenders, court staff or other interested parties where feasible. Withdrawal of approval of lay representatives 52. An approving organisation may withdraw any approval it has granted by providing notice to the approved lay representative. 53. The procedure for withdrawal of approval must involve an evaluation by the approving organisation of the approved lay representative's performance, in particular whether the approved lay representative: no longer satisfies the criteria set out in the procedure for approval is performing inadequately and the approving organisation considers that the approved lay representative's performance could not be sufficiently improved by additional support or training; or has acted dishonestly, in breach of client confidentiality, or in a situation of conflict of interest. 54. Where an approved lay representative has been provided with additional support or training and following a further evaluation the approving organisation considers that the approved lay representative cannot perform adequately, the approving organisation must notify the approved lay representative that the approval is withdrawn. 55. An approval of an approved lay representative is deemed to be withdrawn if the organisation which granted the approval ceases to be an approving organisation. Circumstances in which an approved lay representative may not act 56. An approved lay representative may not represent any debtor or entitled resident other than in proceedings where the debtor or entitled resident is a client of an approving organisation, though not necessarily the organisation that approved the lay representative. 57. Where an approved lay representative is performing inadequately and the approving organisation decides not to withdraw approval; and instead to provide additional support or training to improve the performance of that lay representative, the approved lay representative may not represent any debtor or entitled resident until the approving organisation is satisfied that the approved lay representative can perform adequately. Prescribed persons or bodies to provide Scottish Ministers with information 58. Those persons or bodies with the power to approve lay representatives may be required to provide information to Scottish Ministers about lay representatives. 59. Scottish Ministers will not seek to obtain information on individual lay representatives, but it is anticipated that aggregated and anonymised information will be requested from approved organisations, particularly: total number of individuals approved as lay representatives by that organisation the number of lay representatives approved by that organisation over a specified period (for example during the previous year) the range of Sheriff courts in which these lay representatives operate and the number approved to operate in each Sheriff court details of the training provided to lay representatives by approving organisations over a specified period (for example during the previous year) number of lay representatives that have had approval withdrawn over a specified period (for example during the previous year) and the reasons why approval had to be withdrawn Although not required under the Order, it is hoped that approved organisations will nevertheless co-operate, wherever possible, with any other information requests that Scottish Ministers may make for the purpose of monitoring and evaluation, or arranging additional training, awareness raising or other support to ensure an effective lay representation service is available everywhere. For example information might be sought about: the approximate number of cases in which they have provided lay representation for repossession cases the sort of feedback approved organisations have received about client satisfaction levels when they have offered a lay representation service any issues or difficulties (beyond any need to withdraw approval of individual lay representatives) which have arisen in providing a lay representation service, for example an indication of the approximate number of times when they may have had to turn down requests for lay representation and the reasons for having to do so Indemnity Insurance 60. Persons or Bodies with the power to approve lay representatives are strongly recommended to consider the liability of those individuals that they approve, and indeed the liability of the body for the actions of individuals approved by it. Prescribed bodies should refer to Standard 3.9 and 3.11 9 in Section 1 of the Standards and consider their position. They are strongly encouraged to ensure that they have appropriate Indemnity insurance. Complaints procedures 61. Those bodies with the power to approve lay representatives should ensure that they have a complaints procedure in place, for individuals receiving lay representation to use if any problems arise during the process, and that any complaints are investigated thoroughly. (See paragraph 36 above and Standard 3.11 in Section 1 of the Standards) 62. As part of ongoing work to ensure that approved lay representatives are continuing to act at high standards, prescribed persons or bodies should seek regular feedback from users and stakeholders, such as court staff and Sheriffs. (See Standard 3.12 in Section 1 of the Standards) Housing Access and Support Division Scottish Government Yes, its alot of reading. I am doing alot of reading to fight my bank. i am going to represent myself to contest the calling up notice if my bank decide to go down the road issuing me with a calling up notice. The bank's solicitors keep making threats to take me to court (3 letters so far), and Up to now they have not given me clear breakdown of the debt. Just demand the total amount from the 3 accounts that i have with the bank.

Hi there, I'm sorry if this has been asked a thousand times (it probably has) I've an account with Littlewoods which has got out of hand due to a dip in my income (I'm self-employed) and a rise in the cost of my childcare (nightmare). 've been making token payments for a couple of months have had a letter from their Nationwide Debt Recovery Limited partners now and am going to write back to them with an offer of payment. I've drafted the below - does it sound like the right thing? The arrears of the account are £740-ish and the full debt is £1200-ish so I'm proposing paying off the arrears in 6 months. 'I am unable to keep up my payments to your company or make a payment in full. I am able to make a payment of £125 per month as below to ensure the arrears of this debt are paid off in 6 months. I can pay you is £125 per month. I will be able to make my first payment on 10.12.2014. Please send me a direct debit form if this is required. Please agree to freeze interest and other charges on my account as long as I keep to the payments. I will let you know about any changes in my circumstances. If you are unable to accept my offer and freeze interest and charges, please explain why. Thank you for your help and I look forward to hearing from you.' Is this right? Also - should I send this to the NDC Payments address on the letter? Thanks for any advice.

I'm in the process of completing a form EX550 for my step-son for someone who owes him money to attend court for questioning. I successfully served the form N39 to the debtor and need to submit the EX550 now. I haven't completed one before and aren't sure about the entry: state on oath [on affirmation] that What does that mean? I see in the prompt text it asks for name, address and occupation - is that where my occupation would be? In this case IT Support Technician.... Or is this for something else? Many thanks.

Hi, this is my first post, have followed other threads and got the ball rolling but am still worried about this. Claimant= MKDP Date of issue = 30 April 2014 What is the claim for, POC = By an agreement between HSBC & the Defendant on or around xx/xx/2002 (“the Agreement”) HSBC agreed to issue the Defendant with a credit card upon the terms & conditions set out therein. In breach of the Agreement the Defendant failed to make the minimum payments due & the Agreement was terminated. The Agreement was assigned to the claimant on xx/xx/2013 THE CLAIMANT THEREFORE CLAIMS 1. 11xxx.xx 2. Interest pursuant to section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984, namely 2xxx.xx and continuing until Judgment or sooner payment at the rate of x.xx What is the value of the claim? +£13k Has the claimant included section 69 interest (8%)within the total claim or is it shown separate within the Particulars but not added to the debt? Yes claimant has included s69 interest in total (i.e. added to debt) and its shown separate in Particulars Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Account is assigned and debt purchaser has issued the claim Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Yes - but has wrong address Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Yes – this is incorrect, arrears amount is wrong Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Default sums” – at least once a year ? NO Why did you cease payments:- Initially entered a repayment plan, then raised an account dispute which was not resolved Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? YES, further to above the arrears amounts were incorrectly calculated Story so far; No Account Termination received, but NOA received. Letter before Action from MKDP has wrong address Court Claim form has wrong address – hence cannot use MCOL, contacted court and have posted the AOS with defend all which has been confirmed received I have also sent CCA and CPR 31.14 in accordance with other threads I’ve read At the moment I ’m looking to base my defence on the failure to remedy dispute, defective arrears and DN, I don’t recall any Agreement exists in the required form, and am assuming I’m unlikely to receive anything prior to requiring to submit a defence. I’d welcome any advice in relation to the above to confirm or otherwise if I’m on the right path for preparing said defence, if my basis will be robust enough, or indeed if I should be dealing with this in another manner. Many Thanks

In 2007 on her divorce my friend, had to remortgage her property to pay off her ex husbands debts etc. She took out a first mortgage with a company for £96,000, and a second mortgage with Swift for £10,000 which included paying off a leasing debt. The loans were arranged by a broker who I know received £1000 from Swift as commission. Of concern though is here we are 7 years later, and the house is still only valued at £100,000 - so how the loan ever got approved I do not know particularly as repayments of the two loans were about 60% of her salary. Thats the background. She phoned Swift to get a redemption figure having paid for 78 installments of £137.06 so far, and was quoted a figure of £10,557.16 to clear the debt !!! She was also told her payments were in credit by over £300 - how we do not know. Yet looking back through old paperwork I see she requested similar in 2011, and that letter had charges applied of £33 for a RD cheque, Other Fees (not listed) £127.00. In addition a further fee of £43.05 on late installments. How she has overpaid since then we cannot see at all looking at her statements. ANYWAY - is the above acceptable behaviour or should she be looking at some complaints process. Thanks in anticipation

Guidance: Taking Control of Goods Regulations 2013. An Introduction: On 6 April 2014, the law on bailiffs changed. It is not clear how the new rules will work in practice and whether they will lead to more or to less complaints. In the coming weeks more information will be forthcoming and this thread will naturally be updated. Terminology: The new regulations modernise terminology. The terms 'levy, ‘distress’ or ‘distrain’ are now known as the process of: ‘taking control of goods’ A ‘Walking Possession Agreement’ is now called a: ‘Controlled Goods Agreement’. Bailiffs will now be known as: ‘Enforcement Agents’. The ony exception will be a County Court bailiff who will continue to be called a ‘bailiff’. A ‘warrant of execution’ (in partcular for road traffic debts) and a ‘warrant of distress’ (for unpaid Magistrate Court fines) are now called ‘warrants of control’ and a ‘writ of fieri facias’ (in relation to a debt enforced via the High Court) is renamed a ‘writ of control’ Enforcement Agent Fees: On 6th April the Taking Control of Goods (Fees) Regulations 2014 came into effect which comprises of a strict three stage process. With the exception of 'writs of control' enforced via the High Court, the following fees apply to all debts (council tax, non domestic rates, parking charge notices, child support agency arrears, rent arrears and unpaid magistrate court fines). Stage 1: Compliance Stage Fee: £75 Upon receipt of an instruction from the client, the Enforcement Agent must send a Notice of Enforcement giving the debtor a minimum of seven clear days notice that a visit will take place to take control of goods. This fee is payable for each Liability Order or Warrant of Control. Stage 2: Enforcement Stage fee: £235.00 (plus 7.5% of the value of the debt that exceeds £1,500.00). An Enforcement Agent shall attend the premises to take control of goods prior to the removal of goods. This fee become chargeable when the case in not paid during the Compliance stage or where a payment arragement is broken and an Enforcement Agent visits the property to remove goods. It is important to note that if the enforcement agents is enforcing more than one Liability Order or Warrant of Control against the same debtor he may only charge one ‘enforcement stage’ fee. He cannot apply ‘multiple’ charges. Stage 3: Sale stage Fee: £110.00 (plus 7.5% of the value of the debt that exceeds £1,500.00). This fee shall be charged when an Enforcement Agent attends the premises to remove goods and make preparations for the sale of goods. It is important to note that additional charges may be applied relating to the removal. These include storage and locksmith’s fees. Forms and documentation: This is a major and very welcome change. In the past it was common to receive correspondence from a bailif company that failed to provide a breakdown of fees (and in many cases, letters were undated or failed to even state an amount at all). Those days are gone: Under the new regulations the enforcement agents must comply with strict criteria which much more stringent identification of goods. A seperate “STICKY” provides details of each of the statutory notices and the relevant information that must be provided on them. Making a payment proposal: The new legislation provides debtors with a strict period in which to make payment or to negotiate a payment arrangement but, once that stage is past, there is a more focused and rapid procedure for the identification and removal of goods. It is therefore of vital importance that a debtor does not waste this early opportunity to inform the enforcement company of any vulnerability. Communicating with either the local authority or enforcement agent at an early stage is vital. However, it is importat to be aware that the enforcement company do not have to accept a payment proposal but should certainly do so if the amount being offered is a sensible one which will see the debt being repaid in a short period of time (3-6 months). The ultimate decision on the length of repayment will be for the local authority to decide and should be outlined in their relevant contract. If an enforcement company insist on immediate payment only in order to avoid an 'enforcement visit' (and a minimum fee of £235 being applied) debtors should consider making a formal complaint to the creditor. Vulnerable debtors Further protection of vulnerable debtors has been provided by the exemption from seizure of a vehicle displaying a disabled badge and most importantly, under Regulation 6 it specifically provides that the ‘enforcement stage fee’ (£235) and ‘sale stage fee’ (of £110) is not recoverable unless the enforement agents has, ‘before proceeding to remove goods’ (taken into control) given the debtor an ‘adequate opportunity’ to get assistance and advice’. Further details on how this will work in practice will follow. Most importantly, the enforcement agent will not know whether the debtor is ‘vulnerable’ unless he is advised of this at a very early stage. Communication with the local authority or enforcement company is vital. Times of day when an Enforcment Agent may visit: From 6th April an Enforcement Agent is permitted to visit your property seven days a week (including Sunday’s) between 6.00 a.m. and 9.00 p.m. He is not permitted to visit on Bank Holidays and Christmas Day. Tools of the Trade: Under the new regulations more protection has been given to debtors of items that will be exempt from seizure. These are as follows: Items or equipment (for example, tools, books, telephones, computer equipment and vehicles) which are necessary for use personally by the debtor in the debtor’s employment, business, trade, profession, study or education, except that in any case the aggregate value of the items or equipment to which this exemption is applied shall not exceed £1,350; Clothes, beds, bedding, furniture, household equipment, items and provisions as are reasonably required to satisfy the basic domestic needs of the debtor and every member of the debtor’s household. Cooker or microwave, fridge, washing machine, dining table and dining chairs to seat the debtor and every member of the debtor’s household. Land line telephone, or a mobile phone Medical equipment and items needed for the care of a child or elderly person. Safety and security equipment, eg. burglar alarms, locks and CCTV system Sufficient lighting and heating facilities. Domestic pets and guide dogs Any vehicle displaying a valid disabled person’s badge, British Medical Association badge or other health emergency badge. Note: It remains to be seen in practice how enforcement agents will 'interpret' the wording regarding goods (most particulary; vehicles) 'used personally in the debtor's employment, business, trade, profession, study or education' and the 'exemption' from seizure of those items valued at less than £1,350. In the coming weeks more information will be forthcoming.

New guidance has just been published, which is well worth reading for anyone self-representing... http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/tribunals/employment/rules-legislation/presidential-guidance-general-case-management.pdf It deals with almost everything you need in very basic terms and is a great reference guide.

My husband has an ihpone 4s, on T-Mobile, on contract which we bought from www.buymobilephones.net in September 2012 . ... For a few weeks, since upgrading to IOS 7, hes had nothing but battery issues. We went to the Apple shop who told us to turn off some notification sets then come back if its not helped ...which it didn't. went back today, and tried to get it serviced and a replacement battery. ..to be told that it had been tampered with inside, the screws near the battery compartment weren't there and the battery was stuck down with superglue. My husband has swore blind neither he or anyone else he knows has tampered with it, and would swear under oath if we had to. I don't know what to do.. .whether we should fight it at all. ..and if so, do I fight T-Mobile or buymobilephones.net?? no idea where to go from here. any advice would be really appreciated.

Hello, I have a general question about debt collection standards by electricity providers... The OFT provides guidance on debt collection which seems to only relate to debts collected under the Consumer Credit Act. Debts arising from the supply of electricity seem to be exempt from the act. So my question is, does anyone know whether there are any other acts of law or authoritative guidance regarding debt collection standards for electricity accounts? Kindest Regards FFP

Hi has anyone heard of this company before? I have googled them and found nada which is quite odd. This is in respect of a debt they have purchased from someone else and I have just got a solicitors letter about it, but I have had no contact from Cogent at all and need to get in touch with them. Any ideas? Thanks

Hi All, I was dismissed on grounds of gross misconduct on 30th November 2012. There were two reasons for this dismissal outlined in my dismissal letter:- 1, That i instructed, either directly or by "inference or omission", someone who reports to me to to falsify company documentation. 2, That I failed to correctly hand over information relevant to the issue above and in doing so failed to follow the company Quality and Health & Safety Procedures. The incident was investigated independently (internal, different department) where the two issues were highlighted and disciplinary action recommended. There were a number of mitigating factors highlighted and as such the requirement for disciplinary action was to be based on a balance of probabilities, i.e. was this intentional fraud and an attempt to cover it up. There are a number of issues surrounding the investigation and disciplinary process that did not follow the company procedures: - 1, The Company Disciplinary Procedure states that any disciplinary action will be proceeded by a full and prompt investigation. The incident occurred on the night shift of 30th of September yet, although it was immediately apparent, was not investigated until 24th October. When the investigation took place it failed to interview all the people that could have clarified the first point. 2, The charge of breaching Quality and H&S procedure could be levelled at nearly any mistake but if this was sufficiently serious there are reporting procedures for reporting both Quality and H&S failures. No such reports were raised as, at the time, nobody saw this as that significant. At my first disciplinary hearing on 13th Nov it was not made clear to me exactly at what level I was being disciplined i.e. there was not a statement saying "you did X and Y and this constitutes gross misconduct". This is important as this hearing went on for over three hours and was more of a fishing/muck spreading exercise. In the last 15 minutes I was shown a set of notes claiming to be notes of two conversations me and my manager had on the 5th & 15th of October (also failure of procedure not to disclose before hand). These notes contradicted my recollection of events and, on the surface, appeared to cast doubt on my truthfulness. This hearing was suspended, as was I, until the meeting was reconvened on 27th November. The second hearing was relatively brief and added little to the matter. I was informed in writing that I was to be summarily dismissed on the grounds of gross misconduct effective immediately, I appealed this decision on the 21st of December and I was informed in writing on the 7th of Jan 2013 that the appeal was not upheld. In their response the company agreed that there was no evidence that I had intentionally instructed the falsification of documentation. They withdrew the notes of 5th and 15 of October as I had shown them to be either poor reflections or in fact fictions. They withdrew claims that testimony supported their case when it did no such thing. Instead they have liberally sprinkled the word Neglect around and are stating now that the reasons for my dismissal are unchanged. They are basically saying that through neglect I caused the falsification of company documents by inference or omission. There are many mitigating factors surrounding the initial mistakes which I have not had an opportunity to defend. On paper this incident looks serious to those not experienced in my field but in reality there were no consequences and could have been no consequences because of these errors. There is a general level of shock and outrage amongst my former colleagues that this has happened. I could go on all day, but thanks for reading and ANY advice is greatly appreciated. Damion Edit, sorry I have the full account in a word document which is currently at ten pages and getting longer, I'm trying to condense this down a little for the ET1 and clarify reasons that will appeal to a tribunal.

Blame some of the guys posting on the Ingeus thread for this one... On the whatdotheyknow.com web site, a FoI request was made to the DWP in respect to mandation notices & sanctions issued by WP providers. Of particular interest is one of the attachments in the DWP response. The original request: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/threats_of_saction_issued_by_wor The pdf of interest: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/152662/response/376951/attach/5/WP%20JR%20Assurance%20letter%20v%20final%203.pdf Well worth reading, and I'd suggest printing out copies to use in an appeal if the WP provider's notice does not contain the Annex A wording in full.

Housing Benefit Reviews, Appeals, DisputeForm and Guidance If you have received a Housing Benefit ‘Decision Notice’ and disagree with the decision that has been made there is a three stage process to be followed: Stage 1 Ask the Council to Review its Decision. (NO COSTS) Stage 2 Take your Housing Benefit case to a Tribunal. (NO COSTS) Stage 3 Judicial Review (YES- LEGAL COSTS) STAGE1: Asking the Council to Review its Decision If you think the Council has made a wrong decision about your Housing Benefit, you can ask the Council to look at its decision again. What sort of decisions can you ask the Council to look at again? You can ask the council to take another look at its decision if it says: Ø Your application for housing benefit has been turned down. Ø You aren’t entitled to housing benefit anymore. Ø You‘re entitled to less housing benefit than you think you should get. Ø It has paid you too much housing benefit, and wants you to pay some of it back. Ø It will start paying housing benefit from a certain date, but you think it should be sooner i.e. if you had asked for your claim to be backdated. Ø It is going to pay your housing benefit direct to your landlord in the future. How to ask the Council to review a Housing Benefit decision You must write to the council within one calendar month of the date on the decision letter. If you leave it later than this, the council may say that it doesn’t have to look at your case. If the council’s letter doesn’t explain why they’ve made the decision, you can ask them to write to you with a proper explanation. If this happens, you’ll get extra time to appeal. The days between the council receiving your letter asking for reasons and replying to you don’t count towards the one-month time limit. In your letter to the council, try to explain clearly why you think the decisionis wrong. Include evidence if possible. For example: Ø If the council is wrong about how many children you have, you could send them your child benefit award letter Ø If it says that you’re earning more than you actually do, send photocopies of your payslips. Ø If the figure amounts used to reach the decision are incorrect. It's always best to hand the letter in to the council’s offices - (Always make sure you get a receipt - including the date you handed over the letter - and keep it somewhere safe). If you post the letter – (Always get a certificate of posting and/or use recorded delivery and remember to keep a note of the date of posting, along with a photocopy). What happens when the Council reviews a Housing Benefit decision? Your case will be looked at by a different decision maker from the one who made the original decision. The decision maker will take into account the reasons for the original decision, and any new information you have provided. You may be asked for more information at this point. If this is required the council will write to you again requesting the information they require. You will then get a letter from the council telling you if the decision has been changed or not. The time it takes for the council to decide will depend on how complicated your case is. STAGE 2: Taking Your Case to a Tribunal If you have asked the Council to review its decision and it doesn't change its mind, you may be able to appeal to a tribunal. This will involve a judge looking at your case, and making a decision on it. At a tribunal, a judge will look into your case and make a decision based on your evidence and the council’s evidence. You can attend the hearing if you wish. It’s best seek advice before going down this route, as Tribunals are quite complicated and time-consuming. Are there any Legal costs in Appealing to a Tribunal? NO There aren’t any legal costs What you can’t use a Tribunal for Some decisions made by a Council can’t be taken to a tribunal i.e. those to do with how frequently your benefit is paid. Tribunals also don’t deal with administrative problems, like if there’s been a delay or lack of courtesy from the council. If you think you’ve been treated badly, you should take this up with the Council’s Customer Service Department. Starting your Appeal to Tribunal You can download a Step by Step Guide from the Ministry of Justice website: http://www.justice.gov.uk/tribunals/sscs/appeals You must ask for an appeal in writing. The council may give you a form to fill in, or you (or your adviser) could write a letter. Make it clear what you are appealing against, and why you think the decision is wrong. If possible, include evidence to support your case. Your appeal form or letter must reach the council within one month of the date on the decision letter. If you miss this deadline, you’ll need to ask the council to accept your appeal even though it’s late. Make sure you explain why you are applying late i.e. if you have been ill. If the Council says you haven’t given enough information When the Council looks at your letter, it might decide that you haven’t given proper reasons for an appeal. The Council may write to you and ask for more information. After that, if the Council still thinks you haven’t given enough information, it will ask the Tribunals Service to decide whether your appeal should go ahead. If theTribunal Service is satisfied that you’ve given enough information, the appeal can proceed. If not, your appeal won’t be allowed. Next stages in Appealing against a decision on your Housing Benefit The next step is for the Tribunals Service, which runs courts and tribunals in England and Wales – to decide whether you have a right to appeal or not. If it says that you do have a right of appeal, your appeal can go ahead. If it says you don’t, you won’t be able to carry on with your appeal. You’ll be sent a ‘pre-hearing enquiry form’ if your appeal is given the go-ahead. You must fill this in and send it back within 14 days. The appeal process will end if you don’t send back the form on time. If you can’t meet the deadline, it’s very important to contact the tribunal and let them know why. The form will ask you what sort of hearing you want. This can be either: Ø An Oral Hearing – You or Your Representative will need to go along to the tribunal. Ø Paper Hearing - You don’t have to attend. An oral hearing gives you a chance to put your case in person and answer any questions about your situation. The form also asks for details of your representative, if you have one. This is so the tribunal can send copies of your appeal papers direct to them. If you need a Translator or Interpreter to attend the hearing, make sure you let the tribunal and your representative know well in advance. Preparing for a Housing Benefit Tribunal Hearing Before the hearing takes place, you’ll need to put together evidence for your case and send it to the tribunal. If you’ve asked for an Oral Hearing, the Tribunal will let you where and when this will be held. They will tell you this at least 14 days before the Hearing takes place. It should be held somewhere you can get to fairly easily. (You will be able to claim travel expenses). If you can’t go because of a medical condition, you can ask for the Hearing to be held at your home. For a Paper Hearing, you won’t be told when it will take place, so make sure you send your evidence in as soon as possible. What happens at a Housing Benefit Tribunal Hearing? The Tribunal will involve the evidence being looked at by a legally qualified judge. They will consider all the facts, take into account what the law says and come to a decision. At an oral hearing, you or your representative will get a chance to explain your situation. If you go to the hearing, try not to be nervous or emotional. Make sure you present the facts as clearly as you can. The council may send someone to put forward their case as well. The judge will usually make a decision that day, or you can wait for the decision to be sent to you in writing. STAGE 3: Judicial Review If you don’t agree with the tribunal’s decision You might be able to appear to another, Higher Tribunal – known as an ‘Upper Tribunal’– if you don’t agree with the decision. It’s only possible to do this if you believe that the Tribunal didn’t apply the law properly. You will need to talk to someone who has specialist knowledge of benefits law, such as a solicitor or a welfare rights officer. Applying for a judicial review of a council’s decision Sometimes it's possible to use a process called 'judicial review' to challenge the council’s original decision in court. Judicial review can only be used to challenge the way the council made the decision, not the actual decision itself. It’s a complicated and expensive legal process, and you’ll need to get help from a solicitor or law centre. Appendix 1 contains Housing Benefit Dispute Form and Guidance (In PDF Format):

Thanks for reading! Briefly: - I developed serious chronic incurable illness over last few years and got deep into unsecured debt on various cards - Barclaycard debt nearly into five figures - haven't used the card for years - got to stage where couldn't make payments - card originally taken out in year 2000 - MKDP taken over from Barclaycard - CCA request sent on 22/05/13 - MKDP reply 4/6/13 saying unable to comply but will be liaising with original creditor to request documentation - the claimed amount does appear on my credit file Questions: 1. Will Barclayscard have documents going back to year 2000? 2. Is there any point in sending a SAR to either Barclaycard or MKDP? 3. Would it be best to let sleeping dogs lie re charges etc whilst they can't enforce? Many thanks in advance.

Hi, I was hoping someone may be able to point me in the right direction of what to do now. We have 3 non priority debts with Natwest and Barclays which we have been paying £1.00 a month since 2011 as due to an accident i am unable to work and my partner had to give up his job to take care of me. Now my partner has returned into work as i now have carers , but we still cannot afford to pay much more. We have used the budget summary and have found we can manage £5 to each creditor. I received a payment review letter for 1 of the Natwest Debts (credit Card). Which we have managed to arrange a new agreement of £5. The Same goes with Barclays. Then i receive a letter from Natwest (overdraft) stating that they have been unable to contact me regarding a repayment review and have now passed it to Wescot Credit Services. I telephoned Natwest and explained that this was the first piece of corresspondance i had received from them and they told me they had sent letters to CAB. I asked if that was the case then why was i not sent a copy also, as this is what they have done previously. Surely if they had no joy from CAB then why not send me a letter of some kind. I told them that i thought that it was very unfair of them to pass this onto Wescot as i have never stopped paying them and asked if we could arrange something. I was told to contact Wescot and that was that. I have had numerous telephone calls from Wescot with an automated voice on the other end, which i have ignored. Today i received a red letter from Wescot saying they have been instructed by our client Natwest Retail Finance to collect the outstanding balance on their behalf. To avoid further action you must pay the debt in full etc. I am not sure what i need to do now??? hope this makes sense?

Hi, My company has been issued a Statutory demand by POST by a company that provided us Professional services. We used them for 2 + years. We used to use their services and they would bill us for the time spent. We would request them for some work and they would bill us in good faith that was the arrangement so no confirmation/approval of time spent was required The last two invoices were ridiculously overcharged for the last invoice we asked a break down of the time spent on each of the items. What we got was a vague scribbling of the time spent. I did not dispute it but since some of the same items appeared on previous invoices I asked them for the previous invoice breakdown as well. My hope was to question them when I had all the break downs. They did NOT provide me with the breakup of the past invoice. We had paid all their invoices but the last one where we paid approximately 40% of the dues. And were waiting for more information before we could pay them. They waited for a couple of months and now sent us a Statutory demand. So my question is we dont have any formal agreement with them and have not disputed their invoice they hope was we could settle it once we got all the breakdownsp a nd settle it and not use them in the future. But now since we have this SD what should we do. In reading through some of these posts it seemed like a SD to threaten, they allege we owe them 2000.00 GBP approx but according to us because they overcharged us we have actually paid them more. Now I would like to know from the experts on here how do we respond to the SD as there are no details of the court on it. And how do we dispute this.

Thanks to ScarletPimpernel for the tip.

Hi all again Have a debt that has been passed to lewis group, so far they have been fine with not contacting me by phone e.t.c I replied to there original letter stating i was only able to pay a £1 per month until further notice due to redundancy. I received the following reply today.

Forum virgin so please be gentle with me. I am endeavouring to help-out an old friend who was left with well about £35,000 of debt when her marriage failed seven years ago. When her (ex)husband's business failed she naively took out credit cards and a loan to try to help him. Needless to say, he is long gone but the debts still remain. Fortunately, I am in a position to help her with an interest free 'loan' to settle some of her debt but certainly not to the tune of £30,000+. She had progressively cleared some of the debt under a DMP (set up by the CAB in 2006) and was left with four outstanding accounts, all still being paid under her DMP. One was with Cabot and the other three with NatWest: I successfully negotiated with Cabot and agreed a F&F of £3,350 on a debt of £11,000 - so that was cleared. This left the three Natwest ones. NatWest loan - balance £13,470 - current monthly payment of £10 NatWest credit card - balance £5,120 - current monthly payment of £22 Tesco credit card - balance £1,390 - crrent monthly payment of £8 (Worth mentioning, she also has a NatWest mortgage that is not in arrears). I made F&F offers on these. Both credit card offers were refused. The loan offer was passed to their DCA, Moorcroft, by NatWest. Moorcroft quoted an outstanding figure of £18,729 - almost £4,700 more than she realised she owed. It appears that, in addition to the loan, there are two further debts (£2,748.98 and £1,908.71) both relating to overdrafts. Moorcroft put her account on hold on 27th July 2012 while they contacted to NatWest. NatWest have now passed the account to Fredricksons who have just made contact. They haver sent letters relating to the loan and both overdrafts. I have sent them an athorisation letter so they will now have me to deal with. Although her DMP did include these debts, NatWest had only sent her a regular statement for the loan account, hence her confusion. The £10 a month she has paid has been credited to this loan account meaning that both overdrafts have not reduced at all. So here is my first qestion - as it appears to be over 6 years since any credit was made to these two debts, are they now Statute Barred, even though her DMP included them? I (she) has sent CCA request letters regarding the loan and the credit cards. Care has been taken not to mention the two overdrafts in any communication. File requests have been sent to Call Credit, Experian and Equifax. I also need some guidance on the situation with her credit cards but in the interest of not making this post any longer, I will post seperately on these. Thanks for your perseverance in getting this far.

Good afternoon all! I have a dilemma, I'm not quite sure which route I should take, and I'd appreciate any advice on offer. But first a history lesson, if you'd humour me... I walked into work yesterday (a Welfare to Work prime contractor) and discovered that the top drawer of my desk was missing. It took a minute's reasoning to come up with a theory (an initially weak theory, at first, but the best I could manage at the time): my drawer, unlocked, containing potentially sensitive information had been confiscated for reasons of a potential breach of the Data Protection Act. (Or, at least, the potential for a potential breach, which is why it was initially a weak theory - particularly given that it's common practice where I work while we digitize all paper-based records.) The company takes such things very seriously, to be expected. I approached my immedtiate superior who was unaware of the reason and suggested I continue working as normally. 30 minutes later I was asked to attend a closed meeting with my manager and an impartial minutes-taker, where the mystery of the missing drawer was aired: it was confiscated (the whole drawer) and held in my manager's office because of the potential of a DPA breach, and questions were asked: why had I kept sensitive information in an unlocked drawer? Answer: it was ok'd by management months ago, on a temporary basis, while we were moving to a paperless system, cleansing all paper-based materials, and that secure filling cabinets not be repopulated; that it had not been digitised due to a massive increase in work load; that administration staff requests, or requests for administration time in our diaries, has been declined, and that time seen using our work computers - I had an earlier argument with my manager about this some weeks ago where I put in, then dropped, a grievance against him after he was critical of my time spent using my work computer - for purely administration purposes usually resulted in an interruption to accommodate additional non-administration related tasks. (All these issues I had previously broached with my superiors and HR, and brought to light the stress and impact of the stress on my health and performance, but they were always immediately dismissed.) Anyway, prior to and after the meeting I was expecting to be suspended and was eager to leave, but was only asked to sit in reception. An hour passed and I was told to return to my desk. I did. My drawer was placed back in my desk at lunchtime. Nothing said. I'd lost 2 hours of a busy day. Didn't touch the drawer again that day. (Believe it or not, it was the last thing on my mind - the work load really is that overwhelming.) So, the crux: I returned to work this morning and the drawer is missing again. This time I think nothing of it, believing it merely taken as part of yesterday's meeting, as a continuation of a disciplinary investigation. But shortly before 10 AM I'm asked to attend my manager's office again, where I'm hit with a second charge because the offending documents were still in my drawer. I was escorted from the building under a week's suspension pending a disciplinary hearing next Wednesday. Anyway, good people, where do I stand and what are my options? Like I said at the outset, any feedback would be greatly appreciated. Regards, Simon

Hi My LL's lender has had LPA R appointed. I believe I understand most of how this works but have 2 specific questions I can't find an answer for. Does the LPA R have the legal right to chase me for a small amount of rent arrears dating from before they took over? It's less than a month, so fairly insignificant in the bigger picture. I would argue the debt resides with the LL but I'm not sure if it transfers to the LPA R. I would argue I only pay the LPA R rent as from the date they took over pro rata. Thoughts? My deposit is with the DPS and is protected but has the original LA as the "other half". Not had any dealings with the LA since the 1st fixed 6 month AST ran out, been dealing with the LL direct, but we never bothered to transfer it. The LPA R now want me to assign them as the other half now - they say they need my permission. Sounds all a bit hooky to me. Advice? Thanks

Hi All, Hope you can guide me in the right direction with this. Six years ago I stupidly answered to a phishing letter ( hindsight is wonderful ) This has caused me problems with debt collectors, as I happen to have the same name as the person they cannot trace. You know the scenario, can't find the right person, this prat will do. In December 2007, I received a letter from Lowells, stating that they had contacted me erroneously and that I was not their debtor. They went on to say that all my details had been removed from their database. I had problems in 2010 when I tried to open a bank account, and was refused. This was due to Incorrect information which appeared on my credit reports, and had been placed there by Lowells in 2009, almost two years after the above mentioned letter. I managed to sort this problem, and was told by the CRA's that Lowells stated that it was due to a mistrace. Now for the next one, Crapquest. Harassed by them in 2007 for about eight months. When they eventually investigated the matter, I received a letter stating that when they purchased the debt, they didn't realize that they had been given incorrect information, and had contacted the incorrect person, and that my details had been removed from their system. Now here we are in 2012 and I have started to receive phone calls from Crapquest on an almost daily basis, asking me to contact them. As I have now had more than enough of all this ( I had a heart attack and cardiac arrest last year ) I was wondering what the best course of action is. I am sick of having my name and reputation trashed by these goons, and I am sad to say I have let them get away with it in the past. Cheers