MBNA recently transferred my credit card debt to Idem Servicing without notice, (yes I do understand this can be done, & I do understand that under the 1926 act the full notional balance is transferred regardless of what Idem Servicing paid for it). Not wishing to be in the clutches of a DCA I decided to make a settlement offer of some 55% of the notional balance and about twice what Idem paid for it, working on the basis of the max they would have paid 30% for a debt situation that is now nearly six years old). Despite several tries at written dialogue all I have received in return is a standard letter stating no offer will be accepted until I complete a full financal statement, and boy is this full, it ask what I would consider to be the normal questions, plus items like what do you spend on petfood, sweets, footware etc.! They also want to know why the offer is being made, amount being offered, (already stated), and the source of the offer funds. Also the reference now used is not the cc number but their own, which they describe as a 'loan account'. In the past, I have made offers to creditors of full and final settlements and after negotiation have had them agreed at around this rate (50 - 60%) of the orginal debt amount, without resorting to disclosing so much (any) information. I could understand completing this form if negotiating a monthly payment figure but this is not the case. I should also add the amount I have been paying monthly amounts to more than I would be paying in terms of a minimum payment if the credit card was active. The question I have is would you consider this to be normal practise, or are they 'fishing' to leverage up my monthly payment? Any other suggestions gratefully received as well. As a bit of background IDEM recently accquired two tranches of cc debt from MBNA one at 55 million, the other at 11.8 million. They are part of the Paragon group who are a mortgage and loans company, although if you look at the groups balance sheet you will see the DCA arm (IDEM) contributed 27% of their last group profits, their investment partners (i.e. they have put up a proportion of the money) for debt accquisition are Carval Investors, and Arrow Global, technically this is called a 'shared upside purchase'.

New rules about appeal rights and making appeals against benefit decisions are due for widespread implementation from 28 October. Overview From 28 October 2013, new appeal rules and procedures that already apply to universal credit (UC) and personal independence payment (PIP) are due to be extended to benefits administered by the DWP. Housing benefit is not included – the appeal arrangements for that benefit will remain the same. It is understood that for benefits (child benefit and guardian’s allowance) and tax credits administered by HMRC, the new rules and procedures will be introduced from April 2014, although this is not yet confirmed. The changes are: a requirement to have had, on request, a revision of the benefit decision before the right of appeal arises: so-called ‘mandatory reconsideration’; where mandatory reconsideration applies, the appeal is to be made directly to HM Courts and Tribunals Service, and not to the decision maker: so-called ‘direct lodgement’; time limits for DWP responses to appeals sent to HM Courts and Tribunals Service – but not until October 2014. What is mandatory reconsideration? This clumsy term is the official name given to the requirement that before appeal rights arise a request for the decision to be revised must be made, and that the decision maker then accepts that request so as to consider a revision. If the revision is considered, the claimant is sent a decision on the result of that in a ‘mandatory reconsideration notice’. If the claimant is still unhappy, s/he may then appeal. For example, the revision decision may refuse to change the original decision, in which case the claimant may remain unhappy and so wish to appeal. The usual time limit for appeal applies, from the date the decision in the mandatory reconsideration notice was sent. Note that a revision is required: a supersession will not do. The overall effect is to end the right of direct appeal against an initial benefit decision. The DWP is clear that if the request for revision is late and is not accepted by the decision maker, there is no revision, and there will be no right of appeal. In effect, therefore, the mandatory reconsideration notice is the official recognition of a right of appeal. 1The actual rules that apply to UC and PIP do not read quite as clearly as that. They say that under mandatory reconsideration a claimant has the right of appeal ‘only if the Secretary of State has considered on an application whether to revise the decision...’ (emphasis added).2 The official line is that if there has been a request for a revision, but it is late and the request is not then accepted for consideration, then the decision maker will not have gone on to ‘consider whether to revise’ the decision. Consequently, there is no revision, no mandatory reconsideration notice and no right of appeal. The government has pointed out that it has eased the late revision rules by removing the requirement that the application has ‘merit’ and removing the provision that the fact that the claimant was ignorant of, or misunderstood, the law cannot be taken into account.3 Disputes about whether there has been a mandatory reconsideration will be decided by HM Courts and Tribunals Service, but in practice it will normally look for a mandatory reconsideration notice – ie, a revision decision. The requirement to have a revision (even if that does not actually change the original decision) means that revision grounds and time limits will become especially important in retaining appeal rights. Standard advice is to request a revision within one month of the sending of the decision wherever possible, to ensure a revision on ‘any grounds’ and guaranteeing that there will be a mandatory reconsideration. Otherwise, a request for a statement of reasons for the decision can slightly extend the time allowed for revision (if the DWP accepts that reasons were not already included in the decision, which is rare), a late request for an any grounds revision can be made, or a revision can be carried out ‘at any time’ on limited grounds (usually restricted to cases of official error). But all of those depend on the DWP accepting the request and going on to consider a revision – if not, then there is no right of appeal. Late requests for any time revisions are likely to be the most important route here. Rules currently differ slightly for UC and PIP (and contribution-based jobseeker’s allowance (JSA) and contributory employment and support allowance (ESA) under the UC system) and other benefits, but in essence involve a 13-month time limit, a requirement to show why late revision is sought, why it is ‘reasonable’ to grant it and how ‘special circumstances’ meant it was not practicable to meet the one-month time limit.4 Official guidance says that this should be applied broadly, and the claimant should not be required to show ‘unexpected’ or ‘exceptional’ circumstances.5 When does mandatory reconsideration apply? Mandatory reconsideration has applied to UC and PIP since April. It is expected that mandatory reconsideration will apply to other DWP benefit decisions dated on or after 28 October 2013. That includes decisions about JSA and ESA. The original benefit decision should include a statement to the effect that there is a right of appeal only where the decision maker has considered on an application whether to revise the decision. (If there is no such statement, then mandatory reconsideration does not apply.) Also, the decision should include the one-month time limit for an ‘any grounds’ revision and of the possibility for requesting a statement of reasons where that is not already included. If mandatory revision applies but the claimant attempts to appeal straight away, that may be treated as a request for a revision.6 How is a mandatory reconsideration requested? There are no new arrangements for requesting a revision. It is simply a matter of requesting a revision (or at least asking that the decision is looked at again or be reconsidered) in the normal way, within the standard one-month time limit wherever possible. There is no official form. The request does not have to be in writing but it is better that it is, especially if the standard one-month time limit has not been complied with. The mandatory reconsideration process will involve a decision maker contacting the claimant by telephone before the revision is made, to ‘talk through’ the disputed decision and invite her/him to submit any additional evidence.7 Making an appeal Following the mandatory reconsideration, the appeal must be lodged directly with HM Courts and Tribunals Service and not, as before, with the decision maker.8 This is called ‘direct lodgement’. HM Courts Service has produced a new appeal form (Form SSCS1 – How to appeal against a decision made by the Department from Work and Pensions) and guidance about the process. Its use is not mandatory but is recommended (in any case certain basic requirements including reasons for the appeal remain mandatory). It is understood that if the current appeal form (GL24) is inadvertently used where mandatory reconsideration applies, that will not in itself invalidate the appeal. In England and Wales, ‘direct lodgement’ appeals should be sent to HMCTS SSCS Appeals Centre, PO Box 1203, BRADFORD BD1 9WP. In Scotland, they should be sent to HMCTS SSCS Appeals Centre, PO Box 27080, GLASGOW G2 9HQ. The standard time limit for the appeal is that it must be received at HM Courts and Tribunals Service within one month after the date on which the claimant was sent the result of the mandatory reconsideration – ie, the revision decision in the mandatory reconsideration notice.9 Late appeals remain possible – ie, the tribunal can waive the one-month rule. The tribunal rules require that a copy of the mandatory reconsideration notice is included with the claimant’s notice of appeal.10 It is understood that to facilitate that, claimants will be sent two copies of the mandatory reconsideration notice. However, it should also be noted that the tribunal has the power to waive the requirement to include a copy (as with any other requirement under the tribunal rules)11 – so that a claimant who identifies her/his revision decision well enough might have her/his appeal accepted even without a copy of the mandatory reconsideration notice. If a claimant attempts to lodge an appeal with HM Courts and Tribunals Service without having had a mandatory reconsideration, the appeal will be returned with advice that it is not valid and that a mandatory reconsideration from the DWP should be sought.12 Time limits The DWP has undertaken ‘to introduce time limits to stipulate how long [it] has to respond to an individual appeal’ from October 2014.13 It says that will mean that the DWP will have 28 days to provide an appeal ‘response’ (ie, a set of appeal papers) to be sent to HM Courts and Tribunals Service. Note that there is no intention to introduce any time limit for carrying out a mandatory reconsideration. Note also that at time of writing the relevant rule is unamended (including for UC and PIP), and merely requires the decision maker to provide a response ‘as soon as reasonably practicable’.14 Personal Remarks The DWP denies that mandatory reconsideration involves an extra step in the appeals process or that it constitutes an important change in appeal rights.15 Very arguably, it is both. If revisions are (as the DWP says) carried out anyway it is difficult to see what extra value in terms of dispute resolution there is in requiring one. Someone who wishes to dispute a decision more than a month after the original decision is currently (apart from in UC and PIP cases) able to request a late appeal, even if a late revision is refused. Under mandatory reconsideration s/he cannot. If her/his request for a late or an ‘any time’ revision is refused, then (on the official approach) s/he will not have the right of appeal at all. Judicial review is the only legal redress. Furthermore, claimants will be without the benefit claimed pending the outcome of their request for a mandatory reconsideration. In ESA cases (currently the majority of appeals), it remains that ESA pending appeal is only payable when an appeal has been made – ie, not while a mandatory reconsideration is pending. The very real concern is that many claimants will abandon their dispute because of the simple need to sustain themselves and their families. 1. See, for example, ‘Detailed Lines to Take for Customer Representative Groups’, and Advice for Decision Makers, A3015 and A5043, 2. Reg 7(2) The Universal Credit, Personal Independence Payment, Jobseeker’s Allowance and Employment and Support Allowance (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 2013 No.381 (the ‘UC, PIP etc D&A Regs’) 3. DWP, Mandatory consideration of revision before appeal, Government response to public consultation, September 2012 (DWP), p16. At time of writing, only the UC, PIP etc DA Regs late revision rule was in this form. 4. Reg 6 UC, PIP etc (D&A) Regs; reg 3 Social Security and Child Support (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 1999 No.991. It is assumed that reg 3 of the latter regulations will be aligned with regulation 6 of the UC, PIP etc (D&A) Regs, in particular to remove the requirement that the late application has ‘merit’ and that the claimant’s ignorance of or misunderstanding of the law cannot be taken into account. 5. Advice for Decision Makers, A3016 6. Reg 7 UC, PIP etc D&A Regs 7. DWP, Appeals Reform: an introduction, April 2013, 8. Rule 22 The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Social Entitlement Chamber) Rules 2008 No.2685 (the ‘Tribunal Rules’) 9. Rule 22(2)(d)(i) Tribunal Rules 10. Rule 22(4)(a)(i) Tribunal Rules 11. Rule 7 Tribunal Rules 12. ‘Detailed Lines to Take for Customer Representative Groups’ at 13. DWP, Appeals Reform: an introduction, April 2013, 14. Rule 24(1)(b) Tribunal Rules 15. ‘Appeals Process Changes – Customer Representative Group Questions and Answers’ , V1.0a, DWP, December 2012,

According to this section of the site https://www.gov.uk/become-lorry-bus-driver/licence-validity-and-renewals Drivers over 45 will continue to renew their entitlement as they do now. When you renew your licence at the end of a 5-year period, you’ll need to provide a medical examination report. therefore, a 47 year old that has had the C/C1 class entitlement installed automatically on their paper licence when they passed their test in the mid 80s, will now need to upgrade in the same manner as before, which is - do nothing. However, will/does this situation change if the licence is upgraded to a photo type one based on the following link ? https://www.gov.uk/exchange-paper-driving-licence

A question for you guys out there. I have a wheelchair bound son and I bought him a car to transport him, he is unable to drive himself. Recently one of my sons while driving it had a prang with a boulder so the car is now off road while we sort out quotes to repair. Whilst it is offroad I have sorn'd the car and cancelled the insurance and it is outside his bungalow in communal parkling used by all the residents. The neighbours who are a bit stuck up have complained to the managing agents about the fact the car is an eye sore. The managing agents have stated unless it ir repaired within a certain amount of time the car will be towed and crushed. Also they have stated we need to insure and tax the car whilst it is on the communal land. I am sure that they are unable to take the car away and taxing and insuring the car is not needed while it is sorn'd and not on roads governed by the RTA. Can you confirm if I am correct and could someone point me to the regs so I can draft the managing agents a letter pointing them as to what they can an cannot do. Thanks in advance.

I missed a payment on a loan from an infamours bank. One week later I wrote offering a revised repament plan which was accepted immediately. I have made all the due payments in accordance with the new arrangement. A section of the bank seems to be unaware fo this since they keep mailing 'Arrears' letters based on the original payment regime, and their latest threatens a 'Default Notice' if I don't pay these arrears. Can they legally do this with an agreed repayment plan in place ? They have ignored all my protest letters so far. Luckysandpiper

I was told today at the job centre that the rules have changed. It is no longer a valid reason to not apply for a job because the travel costs exceed the wage. Apparently this means that if I see a minimum wage job that's an hour a day in the morning in London, which costs me £45 a day to travel to, I have to apply for it even though the travel cost is almost £40 higher a day. My question is, if I apply for a job where the travel costs exceed the wage and I was offered it, would I then be able to turn the job down without being sanctioned?

Ensure you're not being overcharged or fooled into thinking the price is lower Two pricing rule changes, completely free of charge CAP and BCAP have today announced changes to rules governing price comparisons rules and the use of price claims that are inclusive or exclusive of VAT. Advertisers can now compare products that may not be identical, but nonetheless meet the same need or intended purpose. The Advertising Codes have also been changed to allow advertisers to make VAT-exclusive price claims, provided the claims are clearly addressed to those that pay no VAT or can recover it. Find out more about these significant changes, including a full regulatory statement, here.

Hope this is the right forum - CAG might like to know that the CPR are about to be changed. This is what came out of the Jackson review so there are a lot of changes. See http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/262/made. The changes take effect on 1 April 2013. The following struck me as the main changes: The small claims track threshold is going up from £5,000 to £10,000. A stricter approach to case management. There is provision for the court to contact the parties to monitor compliance with directions, so I guess the courts will be getting more proactive. A stricter approach to breach of court orders. The language around sanctions has been tightened. I suspect people who don't comply with court orders will soon be more likely to find that their claims get struck out. The AQ is being replaced by a "directions questionnaire". Don't know what this will look like but presumably it will be more detailed than what we have at the moment. When asking for permission to appoint an expert, you must give a costs estimate for that expert.

Interesting question this, please give your answers from the heart and not Wikipedia. I am after the public's perception on this rather than straight from a law book WHAT ARE RULES ????

I heard from a guy at where i work today that these rules are being challenged. I work for an agency at a place that i wont yet name, and have been there for a few years. When the rules about paying the same came in, the place took on 'flexible' workers, at a lower rate than main employees. This means the agency people are getting paid less than main workers as well. I wondered if anyone had heard about this, and if anyone knows where i can follow the court actions on it.

hi everyone hope your all ok. my sister who has mental health issues failed her last medical back in 2009 after scoring 0 point on her medical assessment ( nothing new there) but after we appealed and went to tribunal she was placed in support group after scoring (65 points), we have now received the dreaded esa50 questionnaire again to which had to be filled and pasted back by the 5th January 2013 after speaking to the DWP they said we been sent it to fill it in anyway so we did but what i wanted to know is we filled the form in and sent back 4 days later now i know the new changes take effect for esa with regards to new changes for mental and physical health descriptions on the 28th January 2013 does this mean she will be assessed on the old changed or the new ones? we have still not heard anything back from ATOS as yet either any help and advice would be gratefully appreciated xxx

http://www.justice.gov.uk/news/features/claims-management-crackdown

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21245308

I have been reading all of the threads on this forum and a few others for a few hours now, so I have a general picture of what is going on (i.e. low chance of getting to court, they need to prove the illegal parking damaged > business etc.). However, I see that all the "IGNORE" words on this forum have a link on them, and when I hover I get a message telling me to actually write to the CPP (see below). Any ideas of why this change in attitude? Should we start replying as the message indicates? If you are considering ignoring a letter from a private parking company demanding money for some alleged parking incident - you should understand that this may not be the best course of action. The best thing to do will be to reply with a brief letter denying that any money is owed at all. Ask the PPC if they have authority from their client to bring any legal action against you and are they entitled to bring a legal action in their own name. Finally tell them that depending on their answers, you may be willing to consider their demand but you require a breakdown of the figure they are demanding and an explanation as to how the sum claimed represents their administrative costs. If you reply to the PPC in this way, they will then understand that you are up for a fight, that you know your rights and that there will be no chance of an easy default victory if they decide to take you to court. Write only once and then do not respond to any other demand unless they reply to you in full. We think that this is better than merely ignoring them PS: I suspect some CPP bought advertising on the site for the word "ignore" ?

Hi CAG, Hope I can get your advice on this matter before responding to a recent letter I received from Cabot. I have a credit card debt which was approx. 3,500 with Halifax. In 2008 I sent them a letter offering £2.00 a month which they wouldn't agree to so I paid £2.00 a month anyway. For a while they continued adding interest to the account and subsequently that debt is now almost £5,000. Last week I received a letter from Cabot with a letter from Halifax attached confirming that they have sold the debt to Cabot and asking me to complete a direct debit form. I would appreciate your advice on how I should approach this, can I get the interest removed? Many thanks in advance. tammi

I have been fighting since 2009 with the CSA regarding arrears they say I owe. After involving my MP and speaking to a manager it was reduced from £4000 to about £1200. I am still disputing this figure as I have constantly provided proof I only owe about £400 (from when I was paying legal fees to actually get to see my daughter I stupidly stopped paying maintenance) Anyway, my wife phoned Child Maintenance Options today for advice. After explaining the situation to the guy on the phone he says that from the sounds of it the CSA have not acted properly throughout the whole affair. He says that a signed letter I sent in October 2010 by myself and ex partner stating we had a mutual agreement should have closed my case. Instead they kept it open. Then, by phoning my ex partner up a year later telling her I owed over £3000 in arrears and did she want it collected but would have to end our mutual agreement, this also shouldn't have happened. Has anyone else heard of the case being closed when the parents are happy to pay each other? Also, due to the CSA then barging in a year after being told we were happy with our arrangement, they ended my relationship with my daughter and had my ex laughing all the way to the bank (despite most of the arrears being for money I had already paid!)

As some of you may already know there has been discrpency been given to job centre staff been able to defer interviews. According to my advisor who I have an appointment with and now confirmed by my local welfare rights a email has been sent out earlier this month telling job centre staff they can no longer defer interviews or do over the phone. I spoke to the job center today as well and the lady dealing with me does seem nice but I will know more about how strict things are going to be when I have my interview next week. I find this hard to believe its a reccomendation of harrington as he even stated claimants werent been treated well enough and that job centre staff should have more leeway not less, so I feel the government when stating they implementing reccomendations arent been honest about it.

Hi BBC article on new mortgage rules (coming into force later than anticipated though it appears) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-20069539

http://news.airwise.com/story/view/1349397400.html

Hi. It may be a silly question but best to ask.....When calculating the Statute Barred date, does a credit from a repossession and subsequent sale of goods on an account constitute payment/acknowledgement and therefore the SB date would run from that credit? Thank you in advance.

Hi, Are scottish CPR rules the same as English ones? I have a repossession hearing coming up and would like to know how to get the case dismissed/struck out. Thanks in advance for your help

Switching is currently not available for customers with pre payment arrears of over £200 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19688019

http://lifeintheuk.net/index.php/news/rules_for_applications_from_overstayers_change_from_1_october_2012/

Hi everyone I need some valued help please I have a credit card debt that is soon to be removed from my credit file in a few months due to it being 6 years from the default date. My question is this, originally I wrote and made a settlement offer to the original credit card company in around 2007 , due to them being un coperative the debt was sold/transfered to First ( worst) Credit , I CCA`d them with no repsonse and eventually had a Statutory demand overturned and I won costs! My defense was for them to prove the debt which they didnt/couldnt at that time. Since then I have heard nothing from them , when does the Statute of Limitations come into effect if at all? Many thanks T

Hey guys I am really curious to know what the rules are for demoting someone at work.. I have a manager in one of my stores and he is doing a poor job. Basically his general attitude and belief towards work are not in line with what I want and I don't believe he is going to change. he is too soft on his staff, and let's them get away with things. He has a different management style to mine, and whenever I try to make him see it my way, his response is "we will have to agree to disagree".. He doesn't see that it is his soft attitude that is causing staff to like him and not in fact because he is a good manager .. He has been in that position for 2 years and with the company for almost 5 years. I don't want to sack him, as I could use him elsewhere ito do other tasks, but I do want to demote him, either from his managerial role completely or put him as assistant manager to someone else who will be above him. I just wondered what the rules are for demoting someone? Is there a process I have to follow? As I understand it, I can demote him but still keep his rate of pay the same (which I don't want to do). I should mention he is also on a bonus structure. Any help would be really appreciated guys.. Paul