Hi There, Just a question around DCA's and there tatics. I had a letter from MMile finance regarding a debt for Cash Genie. I've gone in with the mindset of affording just £1 per month which many of my other creditors have accepted. MMile are requesting I fill out a Personal Finance Statement through there website so they can assess for themselves what I can afford. Now while I've got nothing to hide from anyone I just don't feel comfortable disclosing my incomings and outgoings to a third party. Is it a requirement that I comply with this request? Also I've read a lot about CCA's and people sending requests requesting copies of agreements. Am i right in assuming if I send them a CCA request and they cannot provide me with the original copy then the debt becomes unenforceable and my credit file updated to reflect that it's no longer outstanding Cheers P

Ministers have launched a cross-party review of the Freedom of Information Act that is likely to be viewed as an attempt to curb public access to government documents. Critics argued that a commission was likely to lead to more secrecy – allowing politicians and officials to conceal “bad decisions and mistakes”. Campaigners fear that the commission could tighten rules stating that if a request from the public or the media takes a long time to process, it can be rejected on grounds of cost. At present, anyone can ask for information so long as finding it does not cost more than £600 in the case of a government department, and £450 for another public body. Officials have discussed either lowering that limit or including extra items in the cost, including time spent on “considering and redacting” any releases. Labour MP Tom Watson said: “It is quite clear this isn’t a review, it’s a process to roll back the Freedom of Information Act. This is an Act which should be extended to cover more public bodies, yet the Government is going to weaken it by making changes that will render it virtually useless for people who believe in greater accountability.” http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/the-end-of-foi-right-to-know-in-peril-as-government-targets-freedom-of-information-10397935.html

Hi everyone. I have a comparitively small debt of £350 for gas and electricity supplied by Eon at a property I moved out of a year ago. Eon have got PastDue to "manage" and recover the debt but it has not (as far as I can tell) been assigned to them. I have followed previous Forum advice and told them I will only communicate with them in writing and offered them in writing £10 a month. They have now come back to me asking for confirmation that I owned or occupied the previous property; dates that I entered and vacated the property and confirmation of my date of birth. They say they need this information to comply with the DPA. Now I must confess I'm not a leading expert on the Data Protection Act but I thought the act was there to safeguard personal information that companies held on people NOT as a tool to extract info companies do not have about you. If these people are properly acting for Eon shouldn't Eon be able to confirm dates when we were taking energy from them. They were properly informed when we vacated the property last year. I would welcome any thoughts members have please.

Morning All, Not totally sure if have posted in the correct place so apologies if not. Thought I'd share with you an extract from correspondence received direct from the FCA today: General information on the Consumer Credit Act Copy of credit agreement Under section 77 and 78 of the Consumer Credit Act, a lender is required, at the request of a borrower, to provide a copy of the executed credit agreement and information in relation to outstanding amounts within the 12 working days of receiving the request. If the lender fails to comply with this request, it is not entitled to enforce the credit agreement until the request is fully complied with. While the credit agreement remains unenforceable, the lender is still entitled to take a number of actions, including demand repayment of the debt. To meet the requirements of these sections, the lender is not required to provide an exact copy, photocopy or microfiche copy of the signed original. This is reflected in the CCA which requires the copy of the credit agreement provided under sections 77 and 78 to be a “true copy”. Under the Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983, a “true copy of the credit agreement may omit the signature and date of the credit agreement. The “true copy” of the executed credit agreement may be reconstituted from sources other than the actual signed credit agreement following Carey v HSBC [2009]. However, if the lender provides a reconstituted copy of the credit agreement, it should explain to the borrower that this is what it has done. The Purposes of these sections The purpose of sections 77 and 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 is to provide a borrower with the relevant information about his or her contract, in particular the contract terms and the current state of the account. Parliament appears to have recognised that consumers may lose documentation, or may not keep clear records of payments, and may be unable to ascertain accurately what their contractual rights and obligations are, or how much has been paid and what is still owed. This is particularly important if there is a dispute over what is owed, or an alleged default. In those cases, preventing a creditor or owner from enforcing the contract until clarification is provided is an important and reasonable protection for the consumer. At the same time, it’s important to remember that the purpose of this legal provision is to provide information to the consumer; it is not to provide a method for consumers to avoid paying their debts. Unenforceability is merely the sanction where there is a continuing failure on the lender's part to provide the information.

My nephew was self-employed for a part of last year. He therefore submitted is self assessment forms, which they received 24 april 2014. He confirmed this by phone and at the same time they informed him there was a huge delay, particularly with paper applications, and to expect to wait at least six weeks. He rang last Saturday to see how it was all going. A very helpful chap confirmed that it had been approved on 25 June and he should therefore expect payment into his bank this Friday, today. He was told the amount. There is no rebate this morning. He rang them at lunchtime, and they didn´t know what he was talking about, except that they agreed they had received his application had been received. It would not be looked at until 7 August at the earliest. They were as confused as my nephew. It transpires that the person he spoke to on Saturday incorrectly gave him the details from the year before. It took about half an hour for them to realise this. The chap he spoke to apologised and said he had never known that to happen in the seven years he had been working there. This has caused my nephew a few finanical problems, I mean after all, if the tax man says he is going to pay you a set amount on a set date then we believe them don´t we?! Anyway, I feel after such an error (and they have the call recorded apparently) they should now pull his application out of the system and deal with it swiftly and manually. After all, if it only happens once in seven years, it won´t be that difficult will it? And we will make a complaint of course, we have the address, to ensure that it doesn´t happen again in the next seven years, hopefully. Other than them being stupid, is anyone aware of anything we can throw at them letterwise, do we have any rights when this happens etc? Many thanks for reading.

In November 2014, I had a CCJ issued against me, pursued by Mortimer Clarke Solicitors on behalf of Cabot Financial, and citing an original debt to Equidebt. I had confirmed the debt when the papers were issued and made a repayment offer. In May, I got a letter from Mortimer Clarke saying that they had now been sold the original debt didn't relate to Equidebt at all, but to MBNA. I wrote to them asking them to get the CCJ set aside on the grounds that it was obtained with incorrect information. I also issued a CCA request at the same time. They have failed so far to provide the information and have told me that they will take no further action for the time being. However the CCJ is obviously still going to be on my file. Does anyone think I have a good case for having the CCJ set aside? Or am I just going to have to live with it? If they are unable to enforce the debt on the grounds of the CCA request, can I reasonably stop paying it, or will I then be in breach of the CCJ regardless? Any thoughts?

Hi All, I just have some questions in regards to my ESA work focused interview next Monday. I am in the work related activity group. I have searched on Google but it kind of hard finding the answers. Questions: 1. How frequent are these interviews? Does it depend from person to person or not? 2. If they offer you a work placement or some training scheme do you have to go or is it optional? 3. It says on the letter what have you done to prepare for work since your last work focused interview..I have got a certificate in retail and I have started taking driving lessons for work purposes. Is that good enough? If you know the answers I appreciate it you could reply. Thanks Tom

Hi Please excuse me if this is not the right area for my query, I am new to the site. I have 2 friends that have been in prison, they have dearly paid for their crimes both in custodial sentences and extremely large fines. Both of them are now supposed to be 'Free' and they have been released (one of them nearly 5 years ago) some time. The issue for them is a) When they were going through the legal process their cases were put on the web by newspapers and others. b) When anyone does a search these blatantly incorrect and extremely damaging and biased reports are found fairly high up the search engines even 5 years after the effect. The individuals involved have tried to contact the webmasters at these organisations but they just don't reply. Whilst we know they have committed a crime, what is the rehabilitation of offenders act for if not to allow them to try and re integrate back into society. They are not sure who or what they can do (if anything) to have these incorrect, old, obsolete and damaging reports removed from the web. Could anyone offer any advice even on what legal process could be followed. I know you could try and seek a court injunction to get content removed from search engines, but this legal process appears to be mainly for copyright type infringements, the law for anything else seems a little un clear. Any help or pointers would be greatly appreciated. Best Regards, John.

The new bailiff regulations came into effect on 6th April and bailiff fees are strictly controlled and comprise of a Compliance Fee of £75 which is charged when the debt is passed by the creditor. If payment is not made or a payment agreement entered into during the ‘compliance stage’ a bailiff may attend the debtors premises and an Enforcement Fee of £235 is chargeable. Significantly, the new regulations provide that from any payment made (whether to the bailiff, the magistrate court or the local authority) the Compliance Fee of £75 is deducted first with the balance being split on a ‘pro rata’ basis between the debt to the creditor and bailiff fees. This novel approach means that unless the amount due (including bailiff fees) is paid in full, bailiff enforcement may continue and it is this point alone that has caused extreme difficulty to some ‘debt avoidance’ websites with associations to the Freeman on the Land (FmoTL) movement and 9 months after the regulations came into effect it is astonishing that debtors are continuing to be advised by such websites to avoid paying bailiff fees by paying the amount of the Liability Order or court fine only (minus bailiff fees). Despite the regulations clearly outlining how payments are to be calculated, in May/June an individual made numerous Freedom of Information requests to Local Authorities seeking clarification as to how they deal with direct payments made to them after accounts have been passed to bailiffs. Since that time many more FOI requests have been made on the same subject and the up to date position is that approx a quarter of all local authorities have received requests on the same subject. What has been the outcome of these Freedom of Information request? Typically, in the very early stages (May and June) most responses made clear that the local authorities had very little idea as to how the new regulations would work in practice but, since August/September the vast majority of responses confirm that they apportion the payment as outlined in the legislation and that they advise the bailiff company accordingly (or credit the bailiff company) with the payment. PS: It is likely that there are far more FOI requests than outlined here. I have only referred to those that are available to view publicly on the FOI website: What do They Know.

Hi All, Well now debt free regarding Payday lenders however still having an issue with Motormile clowns, i had a loan which was owned by gothia who entered a default on my credit file on 05/04/2010 and marked settled on 14/07/2013 £1004.00 However Motormile have also entered a default for the same debt as follows default date 30/04/2010 £1,774.00 ( started on 1/3/2010 £1,004.00 ) they have also listed a default for an old minicredit debt which was also repaid Started on 23/10/2012 current balance £528.00 Default on 30/11/2012 £390.00 I have wrote and wrote and wrote, i have reported them to OFT but now completely cheesed off, i have not had contact from MM for over a year now yet they still refuse to amend my credit report. What action can i take now or just wait until the 6 year hits andd they drop off my report. Are Motormile still trading ?????? any help would be great :mad2:

I hope this is the right place to ask this question because it is quite complicated. Last year I received a water bill from anglian water for a buy to let property I use to own, the bill was actually dated 2013 but the property was apparently sold by the mortgage company in 2010, I say apparently because their was no formal repossession and i was never signed anything they just gave control to an lpa receiver who managed it badly and it was then sold. I would like to know if anyone knows how anglian water go about getting information on properties and why they haven't got the new owners information. I have emailed anglian water but they take 10 working days to get back to you.

Hi can anyone please help me find out or know if the contract between Capita and DWP mean they have to use medically trained personnel or at least be GMC registered at minimum as they are asking me to go for a medical assessment for pip which i applied for in november 2013, yes long time to wait hey ........ I have sent in a complaint to Capita as i asked them if they provide GMC registered people for this and they said no , when i questioned about the contract some other person rang me said they did not have to be medically trained in any way or registered with GMC for medical assessment, I asked them for that in writing and they sent my case back to DWP saying i refused to co operate, have put a complaint in waiting for reply and their stance on the situation. If anyone knows anything about this then please let me know as i remember that with ATOS they did have to use GMC at a minimum. Also while i remember they also refused a recorded interview and said they do not have to agree with that also........... Anyone also have any idea of whom in the DWP i send a complaint in writing to thgem as they ignored my phone effort of starting a complaint and some case manager or succh rang me and said they would not take the complaint any further so i am going to put it in writing as im guessing they dont want the time frame my aplication has taken being put into them as a complaint..... Thanks in advance people......

Hello my situation is as follows. I have recently managed to pass the 6 year mark on most of my two relatively small debts. I have a CCJ that was paid but remains unsatisfied on my CRA that is just over 5 years old. My partner and i are looking to apply for a mortgage we have as a deposit £17 - £20,000. I was thinking about the CCJ and i remember years ago i was sent a letter by Northumbria water threatening to take it to court and i managed to prove that it had been paid. Could they have still sought judgement on this? I have no paperwork left to prove that i paid it, but it was at a time when i was living with friends in student accommodation and because they were late getting their chunk and i didn't have the full amount we got the late letter and CCJ threat. I would ideally like this to come off my CRA file but at the least have it satisfied, i was annoyed that it is in just my name as their were 4 names on the account. I would appreciate any help and advice in how to move forward so that my CRA file can be in its best state applying for a mortgage.

Hi, I stupidly walked away from a ticket inspector after being caught without tapping in on the London overground. I think in doing this I have made what was a £40 fixed penalty into a serious problem with the possibility of a criminal record, something I really can't have. I left the inspector with my Oyster card which is not registered but I have paid for with my debit card. Can tfl get this information and use it to prosecute? I am guessing they can, but wanted to check. In the case that they can what is the best course of action, to contact tfl and fess up and ask to pay the fine/costs and see if this willingness to right my wrong will prevent prosecution. Or should I wait for the inevitable letter of prosecution and try to settle out of court then? Many thanks for your help! RR

Yesterday I got a 'new' car. After taxing it, it was unclear whether the existing Direct Debit would simply increase, or whether I had to set up a new one. So every one knows, you set up a new one but YOU must cancel your old direct debit or you will get charged for two lots of road tax (your new vehicle and your old vehicle). As this is still fairly new, I thought it worth mentioning in case anyone else has the same confusion.

Hi. I'm looking into this for a friend (yes, that's actually true). The scenario is this: In August 2014 a car was bought on a Hire Purchase agreement from Black Horse. My friend was in a relationship at the time and this car and the costs was to be shared between two people. However they are no longer in a relationship. I believe the HP is in my friends name and not the other persons. She does not want to own the car as a single individual though. So my questions: - If the other person wants to keep the car for themselves is it possible to swap the entire agreement into their name? - If neither of them want to pay for the car is there an option to A- terminate? or B- sell the car privately? - If C- hand the car back and allow Black Horse to sell it then I assume they'll end up selling cheap and my friend still has a lot to pay back? - Are there any options I haven't mentioned above? In a sense, any solution where my friend can gain more than 50% of the outstanding value back is a winner. Thanks.

The new bailiff regulations came into effect on 6th April and bailiff fees are strictly controlled and comprise of a Compliance Fee of £75 which is charged when the debt is passed by the creditor. If payment is not made or a payment agreement entered into during the ‘compliance stage’ a bailiff may attend the debtors premises and an Enforcement Fee of £235 is chargeable. Significantly, the new regulations provide that from any payment made (whether to the bailiff, the magistrate court or the local authority) the Compliance Fee of £75 is deducted first with the balance being split on a ‘pro rata’ basis between the debt to the creditor and bailiff fees. This novel approach means that unless the amount due (including bailiff fees) is paid in full, bailiff enforcement may continue and it is this point alone that has caused extreme difficulty to some ‘debt avoidance’ websites with associations to the Freeman on the Land (FmoTL) movement and 9 months after the regulations came into effect it is astonishing that debtors are continuing to be advised by such websites to avoid paying bailiff fees by paying the amount of the Liability Order or court fine only (minus bailiff fees). Despite the regulations clearly outlining how payments are to be calculated, in May/June an individual made numerous Freedom of Information requests to Local Authorities seeking clarification as to how they deal with direct payments made to them after accounts have been passed to bailiffs. Since that time many more FOI requests have been made on the same subject and the up to date position is that approx a quarter of all local authorities have received requests on the same subject. What has been the outcome of these Freedom of Information request? Typically, in the very early stages (May and June) most responses made clear that the local authorities had very little idea as to how the new regulations would work in practice but since August/September the vast majority of responses confirm that they apportion the payment as outlined in the legislation and that they advise the bailiff company accordingly (or credit the bailiff company) with the payment. PS: It is likely that there are far more FOI requests than outlined here. I have only referred to those that are available to view publicly on the FOI website: What do They Know.

Hi Guys, Recently cleared my IVA and in the process of trying to rebuild my credit rating, have received Credit Reports from the three main agencies and none are showing any info under the "court" headings (wonderful)! What they are showing under Credit Account Information are two current accounts with zero credit and debit balances with one of the banks that was included within my IVA, now I'm no genius but with a basic account with another bank taken out when the IVA was started and my record showing I have two other "live" current accounts surely I'm looking as dodgy as del boy Trotter???? Am I in a position to get these bank account listings removed, I was really feeling quite positive after six tough years but this has put a major downer on me...... As always thanks in advance for any advice.. Kind Regards

I sent a subject access request form to buy as you view last year, after discovering that I had been paying for the following insurances: All sorted EPS A viewing guarantee (£136 has since been refunded because I had never purchased a TV with BAYV). I thought that I had recieved all of the information that was requested. After numerous emails to the company I have found out that they had failed to produce a telephone call log from 2012 and also a recorded telephone conversation in which it is implied that I asked specificaly asked for these insurances for the hp goods. I did no such thing. They have since sent me the call log in which I discovered that they lied about what was said in the conversation and they even lied about the name of the person who I spoke to! They have also conveniently lost the call recordings. I was just wondering if its against the law to fail to produce information that was requested in the SAR as I believe that the reason why some of the information was missing is because it would prove that they are liars. Thanks for your help.

Good evening. In a two-year small claims case (yes - two years!) it looks like things are finally heading to trial*. I am the defendant/counter-claimant and litigant-in-person. Other party also representing themselves. I have just exchanged documents with the other side. On reading their witness statements, I find that one of the statements makes explicit reference to previous settlement offers from us that were clearly marked 'without prejudice'. The figures cited are figures that were presented, but are used to misrepresent the actual offers/counteroffers dialogue (to make me sound unreasonable), without copies of the actual letters included. Question: can I ask the judge to dismiss this witness statement as inadmissible? Alternatively, can I choose to agree to having the 'without prejudice' letters admitted - but ALL of them including the other side's (although none have been included in the exchange documents)? This latter option would make it quite easy to show that the other side is unreasonable. Also, given that the claimant has effectively disclosed in a witness statement that they have offered to settle by paying me, does this imply they have 'dropped their claim'? Can they still go to court on their original premise, namely that I should pay them the outstanding part of their bill? Two other questions: Two of the statements share about 60% of the wording - word for word. As witnesses are meant to write statements 'in their own words', is this grounds for dismissing the statements? Also the witness statements provided by the other side are unreferenced (i.e. allegations without referring directly to related documents, such as quotes, e-mails, product data sheets, etc - although these, with the exception of the 'without prejudice' letters, are included in the exchanged documents, connection to the witness statement is not shown). How would a judge treat a statement that isn't referencing the relevant information? I have looked everywhere online for information specific to the main query, but I can't find anything that explains what I need to know. Can anyone advise me, ideally with reference to relevant law info that I could cite if necessary? Thank you so much. Sue *Details, in case anyone wants to know: the case concerns withholding final 10% of a bill - for faulty windows/fitting. Then being sued by joinery company, and counterclaiming. JOINT Expert report, commissioned a year into the case after pressure on claimants by a judge, found that the company owes me money, not the other way around, due to the nature of the defects - 6-10 times the amount they sued for. Judge at the last hearing pointedly advised parties to find a way to settle out of court. Claimants refused any reasonable offers of settlement (under 50% of max total expert estimate) and made what I consider silly offers (roughly 10% of joint expert's estimate). So far no joinery company I asked has been willing to take on the mess I have been left with, so I think the windows will need replacing - which will cost more than small claims maximum.

Hi Just a quick question about sending letter Right to information request. I know there is £1 fee how do i pay this £1 pound if its postal order is it payable to do company? Thanks in advance

Hi all, not sure if anyone's seen this before but this 145 page document appears to be a Provident Investor Day document. I discovered this whilst googling for some information about our favourite money lender. It's dated 2011 but the information is still relevant as it relates to their procedures Of note is how they define you, ie the Vanquis customer. Also p78 onwards details their debt collection timescale/procedure. It sets out what they do & when and when they escalate impaired debts. Makes interesting reading.

Hi, I need some advice in the following situation. I've recently completed a 3 month contract in a job where my direct line manager was short tempered, verbally abusive and would often shout, yell and bully me and all other fellow staff. During the contract I juggled numerous projects. One major project was completed and made substantial progress on the others. During the final week, my manager asked if I would consider a contract extension if it was offered, where I replied that I would consider this but did not confirm anything. Since I did not hear anything further, on the final day of my contract, a handover via email was given along with an update on the current state of all projects and left the company. I recently attended a 1st stage interview for another job after leaving the company, where the offer was conditional on a successful vetting outcome. Information requested was some standard documentation, including employment history over the last 5 years, along with details of my direct line managers during this time. During my 2nd stage interview, the interviewer informed me that my line managers have been contacted via telephone, where my previous manager (who was short tempered, verbally abusive and would often shout, yell and bully me and other fellow staff, where I would definitely not disclose by choice, but I could not supply false information on a vetting process) supplied a bad reference along with an inaccurate record of my duties. For example, I only worked on one project and made no progress on the other projects; I had left the company suddenly, etc. I believe I was not considered for this job that required the vetting process, based solely on the inaccurate information supplied by my previous line manager via the telephone. I have heard that I can request information about myself due to the data protection act? However this was a telephone conversation between my previous line manager and my new potential employer. I now plan to make a formal complaint the HR department, however given that this was a contract role, will anything happen? Also, can a legal case be made? Thanks in advance for any help you can give me.

Hi everyone Long time lurker, have successfully used advice from these forums in the past, so a big thank you to everyone taking time out of their busy lives to help all of us who are unfamiliar with how to deal with such agencies. Back in 2010 I fell into debt due to a business failure. I have a few creditors and all but one have been very reasonable. Following advice from the then CCCS I entered into agreed payment arrangements with my creditors and this has been working fine for both parties involved. I recently received a letter from Shoosmiths with regard to the Natwest debt. It was my understanding that Shoosmiths were debt collectors who had purchased the debt from Natwest as I am paying Shoosmiths directly, and have been for quite some time. They are asking quite aggressively for me to fill out a pretty invasive form which includes the expected income and expenditure but also lots of other personal details that I wouldn't normally pass on to anyone, such as employer details, asset details etc etc. My question is, what information am I bound by law to pass to them? I feel that a basic income and expenditure budget sheet should do, but they are threatening court action if they don't get everything they want. I am furthermore uneasy about providing personal information after having read of their failings by sending a lot of debtors information to one debtor they were pursuing. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Please do not judge me but I have cheated the benefit system. On Monday of this week (28/04/2014) I received a letter which has requested that I attend an interview at my local Job Center concerning "an investigation into alleged criminal offences in relation to a claim to benefits" The letter does not give any further information other that I might want to have some legal representative there with me and that I should notify them that I will be attending. This I have done and have arranged for a legal representative as well to be there. A little background concerning what led to this situation. I have been on JSA for about 9-10 years and during that time I have done everything that the job centre as asked of me gone on courses both voluntary and mandatory, Been on the Work programme and finished it. Applied for numerous positions and showed them I was trying hard to get employment. But, at the end of it all I still was unemployed. All through this time (except for a three year break) I have kept an hobby of mine going and even tried to turn it into a business using a employment run test trading scheme that allowed you to start up a business whilst still receiving benefits. Business initiative (BI) were the people who oversaw the scheme. However during the test period BI did something which completely upset me to the point that I quit the scheme and did not touch my hobby again for three years. Moving on :- My wife is disabled with a variety of conditions (osteoporosis, Irritable Bowel Syndrome + others) and we have never had any Benefit for her except for DLA High rate Mobility) they never let us have the Care component. Anyway she developed another problem about 12 months ago and in receiving a prescribe drug for that to keep it under control as there's currently no cure for it. Something to do with the three main nerves in the face becoming inflamed and this causes severe pain in the head and neck. Even forgetting her tablets for one day means it takes about 10 days to get it back under control again. Anyway to keep it short Because I did not want her to be on her own in the house if I was lucky enough to finally get a job I did something silly and started my hobby again. However, due to the bedroom tax money had become rather tight and so I sold some of my things I had created to pay for my hobby and not have to use any money coming in from benefits as these were needed to pay for our normal day to day living. The problem is that the hobby grew beyond just a few £'s per week and grew to about £50+ after all the costs involved were taken off. This money I reinvested in better equipment and materials for the hobby. None of it was ever used for day to day living. I did not tell the JSA about this but discussed the possibility with them of getting onto a scheme they were now running whereby you received a proportion of the benefits you used to get for about 26 weeks and during that time you traded. We even went as far as getting me with a Enterprise Support Agency who would look over a business plan I was creating and make sure it was viable. However, the name Business Initiative came up as the people who would oversee my business progress and it was alarm bells instantly. As previously mentioned I had had a bad time with them and I just did not want them anyway near me again. The hobby(business) kept growing and the calculations showed that I was now at a point that with Working Tax credits and the income I was generating I could finally get off JSA and made the decision to go self employed as I did not want to waste all the effort I had put into it. The irony is that on the very morning I was going to sign off, get registered for self employment with the tax office and contact my housing association the above mentioned letter came and it completely put everything into jeopardy. So, here I am asking for any advice concerning what I should do now. I know I should not have done it but I only really did it with the intention of being there for my wife and to finally follow a dream I had had since I was a boy of running a business in an occupation I love. Please advise and I will answer any questions you may have (except what the actual business would be). Oh and I forgot to say that I have no criminal record at all, This would be my first offence if it did go to court.