|
Post by dogless on Mar 26, 2024 16:51:20 GMT
Sorry Jim, but it's the issue I raised. The fact that a decision is legally correct isn't always the complete story. Victim's families should be a prime consideration, not dismissed or at best an after thought. Probably no change to verdicts / charges , but at least they'll feel they've been heard and considered. Only seems fair. Rog
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Mar 26, 2024 17:22:23 GMT
Sorry Jim, but it's the issue I raised. The fact that a decision is legally correct isn't always the complete story. Victim's families should be a prime consideration, not dismissed or at best an after thought. Probably no change to verdicts / charges , but at least they'll feel they've been heard and considered. Only seems fair. Rog Don't be sorry, I think we agree more or less. I heard a discussion on R4 about changing the possibilities for murder, to have 3 not 2 options, Murder, 2nd degree murder and manslaughter. This case would be 2nd degree, because of the madness.
|
|
|
Post by thebfg on Mar 26, 2024 17:27:57 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on Mar 26, 2024 21:30:16 GMT
Sorry Jim , but it's the issue I raised. The fact that a decision is legally correct isn't always the complete story. Victim's families should be a prime consideration, not dismissed or at best an after thought. Probably no change to verdicts / charges , but at least they'll feel they've been heard and considered. Only seems fair. Rog Provision in law was made for this, a few years back. Victim's family members have the opportunity to make impact statements during a trial.
|
|
|
Post by dogless on Mar 26, 2024 21:42:45 GMT
Read the details of the case.
Rog
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Mar 26, 2024 22:37:06 GMT
Last May I transferred my DC pension fund to a different provider, I was totally fed up with the incompetence of the provider who were employed by the company scheme. 4 months later I received a message querying what I had put on the (rather complicated) transfer form. For the technically minded it was whether the fund was crystallised or not. I told them that what was on my form was correct, and the information sent from the previous provider was wrong. They wouldn’t take my word for it even though my position was less favourable for me than their position. It dragged on. Eventually I made a formal complaint in December.
The problem was resolved in early January, but I have now just received a formal response to my complaint. They admitted they’d cocked up and have sent me £600 compensation. Of course this is not government money so I don’t feel too bad about it, but it does slightly cheapen the process. I made the complaint in order to get the problem elevated to urgent and for them to learn from their mistake. I didn’t make the complaint in order to receive some money. But I’ll be keeping it of course!
|
|
|
Post by brummieboy on Mar 26, 2024 22:46:33 GMT
At the end of the day, no one really suffers in the finiancial sector. when I annuitised my pension, My IFA cocked up and declared a larger amount than I had. He agreed that he would forego his commission and pay it to me. He paid me an amount, and whe I received the final statements, it showed hre only gave me half of the commission. I had no further comeback and realise their is no gentlemens agreement in the fonancia; sector.
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on Mar 27, 2024 1:08:32 GMT
Last May I transferred my DC pension fund to a different provider, I was totally fed up with the incompetence of the provider who were employed by the company scheme. 4 months later I received a message querying what I had put on the (rather complicated) transfer form. For the technically minded it was whether the fund was crystallised or not. I told them that what was on my form was correct, and the information sent from the previous provider was wrong. They wouldn’t take my word for it even though my position was less favourable for me than their position. It dragged on. Eventually I made a formal complaint in December. The problem was resolved in early January, but I have now just received a formal response to my complaint. They admitted they’d cocked up and have sent me £600 compensation. Of course this is not government money so I don’t feel too bad about it, but it does slightly cheapen the process. I made the complaint in order to get the problem elevated to urgent and for them to learn from their mistake. I didn’t make the complaint in order to receive some money. But I’ll be keeping it of course! I received 3 separate compensation payments when I dealt with my late Mum's estate. Two of them were from the same financal institution. In two of the cases I requested nothing other than the relevant errors to be corrected. In the other case I simply detailed their appalling administration, requesting nothing. In all three cases the written replies stated the formalities. Name, address, account or case no, etc. The next priority of each business was to say 'sorry' and offer me an amount of compensation. A sum that I could dispute with the appropriate ombudsman, should I consider it inadequate. I'd neither asked for a feigned apology, nor compensation. In each case the detail I provided was not engaged with in any meaningful way. In essence, my complaints were ignored. Businesses are on the compensation culture bandwaggon. They love it. The cost of their multiple compensation payments is included within the higher prices we all have to pay for everything that we buy. In the past, complaints had to be properly dealt with. Now, complaints are simply bought off, at no real cost to the business concerned. Government is on the fence with this. On one hand, HMRC are still pretty fair to all as regards what money they send out to buy people off. Today i've written to challenge a penalty fee they issued to me recently, in relation to my deceased father. A penalty demand which was addressed to the incorrect entity. A fee which, if it were to be valid, would require a dead person to either be working or otherwise, be engaging in some type of profitable trade. A fully completed tax return having been submitted, confirmed and agreed by HMRC and the due sum paid, more than 12 months before the date which resulted in the penalty notice being issued. A dead person who happens to be the father of the person they sent the bill to. I'm not expecting an offer of compensation from HMRC. I don't want one. Neither do I want an apology. All I want is an acknowledgment that the penalty has been cancelled. It wouldn't be fair for me to receive money from other tax payers, impoverishing them, just because HMRC fucked up. Government itself though, is on the slippery slope. The NHS, cash strapped, millions on waiting lists, is sending out money to people in ever increasing amounts and frequencies. I've said this before but compensation culture is a terrible blight on society. The only ones who benefit are lawyers and insurance companies. Unlike Dogless I believe government will make a payment to WASPI women. It will be at a lower amount. Any amount though, will represent a capitualtion of government in face of lefty liberal onslaught. It's simple really. When equality is the law, it's not 'inequality' to equalise the pension payments due to men and women. Plenty of notice was given. It doesn't matter that everyone concerned didn't receive personal notification a certain period of time before the change was due to take place. It's the responsibily of individuals to know the law. Ignorance of the law is no defence. This is a fundamental of the rule of law.
|
|
|
Post by dogless on Mar 27, 2024 8:30:04 GMT
You really should download and read the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsmans Report and its findings rather than just repeating your opinion.
Rog
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on Mar 27, 2024 8:39:40 GMT
You really should download and read the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsmans Report and its findings rather than just repeating your opinion. Rog I understand its findings. Law is superior to all other opinions, including this one. Maybe you prefer a system where unelected officials hold sway over the people who have been democratically elected, by the people, to manage the affairs of the country. I don't. I believe in the rule of law.
|
|
|
Post by dogless on Mar 27, 2024 9:21:32 GMT
Read what you're talking about.
Rog
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on Mar 27, 2024 10:28:37 GMT
Read what you're talking about. Rog There's no need to read any reports by unelected officials. They are irrelevant. The highest level of the judiciary enabled by a democratically elected government has already made a final decision. Equality laws apply to all, not just hand selected groups.
|
|
|
Post by dogless on Mar 27, 2024 10:33:39 GMT
I'm pleased you have the confidence to dismiss something you've never read because you know best.
We know someone else like that here 😁
Rog
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on Mar 27, 2024 10:36:25 GMT
In other news HMRC have cancelled the penalty notice issued to me in relation to a self assessment for my late father. This came about due to a simple error by an HMRC employee. There were no grand apologies requested, nor were any given. Apologies these days of course, being a green light for a compensation claim. No request for an issue of other people's money, nor any offered.
Just the way things should be, if we as a country wish to avoid plunging even further headlong into the cancer that is compensation culture.
HMRC have proven in this case that they can be reasonable, and fair to all. Let's hope that other aspects of goverment can be equally equitable.
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on Mar 27, 2024 10:38:39 GMT
I'm pleased you have the confidence to dismiss something you've never read because you know best. We know someone else like that here 😁 Rog All I need to know is that the rule of law, democratically enabled, is the system in this country. You seem to be some way off understanding this. Or if you do understand, you consider mob rule to be a better option.
|
|