|
kick up the biggest god drat fuss you possibly can in any way you can
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 17:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 00:38 |
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:Well the DWP wrote back about the mandatory reconsideration on the IIDB benefit I applied for. They are sticking with their original decision. I don't have the latest figures, but the DWP have a terrible record at tribunals and they are constantly fighting to limit their scope with little success. Tribunals take longer than reconsiderations so make sure you've happy that your claim is the best argument you can give and that you left the dwp with as little room for dishonest interpretation as possible - the whole thing is easier if the surface reading can only possibly support your award and the dwp are forced into getting the law wrong, accusing you of lying, or making demonstrably false claims about your condition. If you're happy that your case is solid then go ahead with it, if you think you could have done significantly better it's sometimes worth restarting the process and taking a better claim all the way through to the tribunal. Make sure to take care of your mental health and remember that it is designed to make you feel hopeless - any such feelings imply nothing about who you are, what you deserve as a person, and what you are entitled to from this process. Take your time and ask for help from those around you, if you need to, and remember that your worst case scenario here is materially identical to not following through. You have nothing to lose, plenty to gain, and your chances are better than you think right now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 17:46
|
|
|
You might also break some horrible little DWP toerag's heart, and spite is almost worth more than money.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 17:47
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:Well the DWP wrote back about the mandatory reconsideration on the IIDB benefit I applied for. They are sticking with their original decision. Contest their decision and don't let the bastards grind you down. Listen to Spangly A. -------- edit: regarding these travel rules; just remembered that the UK was well involved in creating all these 3rd country rules that they are now running afoul of. Irony.. thy name is Brexit. Just Another Lurker fucked around with this message at 17:54 on Dec 30, 2021 |
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 17:50
|
|
|
I did jury service years ago and ended up foreperson on two cases. It was interesting to say the least. First was shoplifting case where two women between them had stuffed nearly the entire stock of a clothes shop down the back of a child's pushchair and claimed it fell there by accident. One of the women had some eyesight difficulties, but when she was called to the witness stand, she was walking quite happily to the dock and the way the court was arranged (it was a temporary building being used while the main court was being refurbished) the solicitors and barristers were located alongside the jurors. The barrister hissed to the solicitor - for heaven's sake go and help her! (She didn't need help which kind of undermined the defence argument!) Also, in the jury room, two men refused point blank to even consider the evidence because they said no way were they going to say a woman with a child was guilty no matter what she'd done or what the evidence. Some of the women jurors tried to convince the men how impossible it is that a puffa jacket, sheets, duvet covers etc could 'accidentally' fall down behind the seat of a pushchair with a child sitting in it at the time. The other case was a knifing (GBH not murder). Anyway, at the end after we'd made our verdict, the defence read out all the convictions the victim had for knifing too (which we had no knowledge of when we came to our conclusion -just as well as we would have been hopelessly prejudiced against the victim). I did get called up for jury service a second time but wangled out of it somehow. How come I got 'invited' twice and most people never get called up. (Rhetorical question.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 17:59
|
|
|
Umbra Dubium posted:I'm going to choose to believe the latter is a direct consequence of the former. Alas it's probably because I ticked the box that said "Yeah you're gonna have to pay me the maximum compensation" - I couldn't help but notice that every potential juror in a suit[1] got told they wouldn't be needed. Anyway the best bit of the story is when they did the briefing prior to selection. First of all it was actually at the Old Bailey, which was cool, and then they realised there were too many people to fit into Court 19, where they normally do the briefing, so we all got to go into Court Number 1. I snagged a seat in the press benches just behind the dock and was then annoyed as things got crowded enough that some people got to sit up in the judge's benches (and the little throne behind the judge where the Lord Mayor can sit if he fancies popping along), but then more and more came in and there was some worried whispering from the clerks, until one of them went got up and said the magic words... "Hi everyone, we've got a bit of a problem because there's just not enough space and we still have six people to fit in. Now we don't want to force anyone, so can we have some volunteers who are happy to sit in the dock?" I swear to god my hand broke the sound barrier on it's way up, and I snagged the front seat (there's actually room for 7 or 8 defendants in there). It's not something that's obvious in photos (or TV shows) but the court really is laid out like an amphitheatre with the dock in place of the stage - everything is laid out facing it, and every single person in the room was suddenly staring right at me, and I had to fight the urge to shout "I AINT GOING DOWN[2] YOU SLAAAAGS" that bubbled up from the pie and mash bits of my very DNA. [1] I wasn't in a suit of course, nobody was getting married or buried or marrying a corpse (and also I'd ridden in and I'm not Italian enough to get away with a suit on a motorbike), but without being classist it was pretty obvious from the clothes involved that the decision was at least partly based on how much this was going to cost them [2] Fun fact - "going down" - in the sense of going to prison, get your mind out of the gutter - comes specifically from the Old Bailey which, with that weird Victorian obsession for efficiency, has staircases leading from cells directly below the court straight into the dock, and yet is used all over the country and all over the English-speaking world. Ditto judges using "Take them down" as an instruction to the guards to take the defendant to the cells, used all over the country even though it only applies to the original 8 courts in the Old Bailey (not even to the newer courts in the same complex).
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 18:01
|
|
|
Thanks all. I will probably take a few days over new year when nothing will be open and then apply in the new year. I think I did feel hopeless at first, but then like you say, that's the cruelty by design bit in action. I'm also going to try and make a few appointments with my GP to see if there's anything helpful they can dig out of my medical history to back me up. I assume it'll be a long process, I just worry that I'll turn up, argue my case, and then the DWP will point out a procedural technicality that makes my argument ineligible. Sort of like those people who try to Vicki Pollard their way out of things by talking about morality /' yeah but he said this' to a cop who absolutely does not give a poo poo unless it affects the technical points of the case.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 18:02
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:Alas it's probably because I ticked the box that said "Yeah you're gonna have to pay me the maximum compensation" - I couldn't help but notice that every potential juror in a suit[1] got told they wouldn't be needed. It would be the suit. People in suits can't be trusted to be sympathetic to the defendants. Same happened when I did jury service. I didn't get deselected probably because I was wearing a t-shirt with a skull or two on it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 18:04
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:Alas it's probably because I ticked the box that said "Yeah you're gonna have to pay me the maximum compensation" - I couldn't help but notice that every potential juror in a suit[1] got told they wouldn't be needed. Have you been to see witness for the prosecution? It’s in an old courthouse and for each performance there are 12 “jury tickets” on sale where you sit in the jurors’ seats and actually decide a verdict at the end. It’s great fun.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 18:16
|
|
|
learnincurve posted:Andrew Neil is the most Saville vibed motherfucker on the planet. He increasingly resembles one of the weird creatures in Naked Lunch. I half expect him to start having grotesque body-morphing intercourse with a fleshy, portillo shaped typewriter by early next year
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 18:19
|
|
|
Tesseraction posted:Would love to see what people like this would think if black comedians started doing whiteface and making fun of bigoted old gammons. Reminds me of this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_LeJfn_qW0
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 18:26
|
|
|
Red Oktober posted:Have you been to see witness for the prosecution? It’s in an old courthouse and for each performance there are 12 “jury tickets” on sale where you sit in the jurors’ seats and actually decide a verdict at the end. It’s great fun. I remember reading about it and thinking it sounded interesting but that was in February last year and...
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 18:40
|
|
|
Jaeluni Asjil posted:It would be the suit. People in suits can't be trusted to be sympathetic to the defendants. Same happened when I did jury service. I didn't get deselected probably because I was wearing a t-shirt with a skull or two on it. I was in jeans, bike boots, and a Ben Sherman shirt under my leather jacket - it's possible that they only had trials of mods coming up and dismissed me on the grounds I'd be prejudiced against them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 18:42
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:I was in jeans, bike boots, and a Ben Sherman shirt under my leather jacket - it's possible that they only had trials of mods coming up and dismissed me on the grounds I'd be prejudiced against them. Hm interesting. I understood from your earlier remark that you were in a suit. Maybe it was a 'white collar crime' defendant and they only wanted suits to judge it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 18:46
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:[2] Fun fact - "going down" - in the sense of going to prison, get your mind out of the gutter - comes specifically from the Old Bailey which, with that weird Victorian obsession for efficiency, has staircases leading from cells directly below the court straight into the dock, and yet is used all over the country and all over the English-speaking world. Ditto judges using "Take them down" as an instruction to the guards to take the defendant to the cells, used all over the country even though it only applies to the original 8 courts in the Old Bailey (not even to the newer courts in the same complex). My grandmother used to say "going under the clock" for this because apparently the boro jail used to have a clock tower. Not sure if it refers to the cells under the town hall or not.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 18:49
|
|
|
I'm one of those weird people who wouldn't mind getting called up for jury duty, which means either I never will, or I will get an incredibly boring fraud trial that lasts for months where everyone is an insufferable hedge fund manager. A friend did jury duty a couple of years ago. It was a sex offence and the person was found guilty unanimously, but she genuinely got to hear an "it's what she was wearing" in the wild from a fellow juror.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 18:51
|
|
|
Jaeluni Asjil posted:Hm interesting. I understood from your earlier remark that you were in a suit. This was pre-selection - they know they're going to need, say, 5 juries but they invite 80 people knowing some people just won't turn up for whatever reason and then send 10 or 15 home, so they know they're going to have enough to cover everything - I and the suited ones were sent home before they'd even begun the first selection when literally all they knew about us was name, age, and how much they were going to have to pay out per day for our time. (My company does have the option of letting you take it as free paid holiday, presumably just to avoid the paperwork with filling out the claim forms, but a couple of people had told me that you were much more likely to get sent home if you told them you'd need compensation - while I *was* sort-of interested in doing the duty, especially at the Old Bailey, I had some family issues at the time and would have been stressed as gently caress being out of contact all day, so I thought I'd give it a go.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 18:56
|
|
|
When my father was alive he also apparently lived near the police station so he ended up in an awful lot of police lineups as apparently they would just go round the nearby houses looking for people who sort of fit the bill.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 18:58
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:I assume it'll be a long process, I just worry that I'll turn up, argue my case, and then the DWP will point out a procedural technicality My appeal process went like this: Me: Please reconsider DWP, since your own evidence contradicts you. DWP (mandatorily): No. Tribunal judge (18 months later): Before we get down to it, DWP, doesn't your own evidence contradict you? DWP: Yes it does, don't know what happened there, we concede. They don't spend money on clever lawyers, they just know they'll win a percentage by dragging their feet.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 19:04
|
|
|
I only got invited once (in Canada) and my work fully covers jury duty at 100% pay so I was all stoked Arrived at the place to find the defendant had cut a deal the night before so it was cancelled
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 19:06
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:When my father was alive he also apparently lived near the police station so he ended up in an awful lot of police lineups as apparently they would just go round the nearby houses looking for people who sort of fit the bill. How many times did he get picked out?
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 19:08
|
|
|
Failed Imagineer posted:How many times did he get picked out? Not sure, never got to ask, alas.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 19:11
|
|
|
Lady Demelza posted:I'm one of those weird people who wouldn't mind getting called up for jury duty, which means either I never will, or I will get an incredibly boring fraud trial that lasts for months where everyone is an insufferable hedge fund manager. Brother was the only one ever called up. And it was a really really boring fraud one involving two accountant firms. Now he has a Masters in a subject that uses math a lot, and he said it was just tables of numbers, and trying to see where the numbers went wrong. OwlFancier posted:When my father was alive he also apparently lived near the police station so he ended up in an awful lot of police lineups as apparently they would just go round the nearby houses looking for people who sort of fit the bill. We can Sherlock deduce from this that either your dad was the most average of average looking bloke, or a shifty looking one :P
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 19:18
|
|
|
happyhippy posted:We can Sherlock deduce from this that either your dad was the most average of average looking bloke, or a shifty looking one :P Sort of both, I think.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 19:19
|
|
|
I did my first jury service recently & (afterthought, there's some bad poo poo in here so don't unspoiler) it was a nonce & the very expensive QC defence spent a full week aggressively cross-examining the literal child who had been repeatedly raped, it was like watching torture. Do not recommend, cried a lot. Oh & there was a bunch of child pornography in the evidence that I guess they just didn't regard as being child pornography because it was so much tamer than the other poo poo that wasn't in the bundle, so there was a bunch of "& if the jury will just turn to page 17 oh great more child porn wtf is wrong with you people" 
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 19:22
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:When my father was alive he also apparently lived near the police station so he ended up in an awful lot of police lineups as apparently they would just go round the nearby houses looking for people who sort of fit the bill. Yeah, I used to work right next to Chiswick nick and was asked a couple of times if I fancied being in a parade but my boss would never let me have the time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 19:24
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:Thanks all. I will probably take a few days over new year when nothing will be open and then apply in the new year. I think I did feel hopeless at first, but then like you say, that's the cruelty by design bit in action. One of the limitations on the tribunals is that they can't really use new evidence - I'm not a lawyer and I have absolutely no idea if there are any qualifiers to that, but on the balance anything that stops the DWP stalking you and presenting ten minute clips from several weeks of PI footage to cast doubt is probably a rule in your favour. If you get anything from the gp that casts strong doubt on the DWP's assessment that you can't otherwise easily dispute, or allows you to firm up part of your claim into a solid "I cannot do this task to the standards used to define disability", that's when you'd think about if you should restart. You work out what scores you need to get for the award, what score you can expect to get from what you've provided, and what margins you have between those. Don't waste your own time and (eventual) income redoing a perfectly sound claim over meaningless points, and don't walk into a tribunal with any unnecessary risk you'll regret not having something important. The process takes a long time but it's really just two letters and a hearing. You get your acknowledgement and a rough backlog estimate, you eventually get your date, then you show up. You're not on trial, you aren't suing anyone, you aren't there to prove anything. You're there to tell the judge that you have an injury that prevents you from performing certain tasks in the manner, time, safety, skill, and comfort of the hypothetical able bodied peer, that you provided evidence to the DWP that supports this, and that the dwps estimation of your entitlement is not based on that evidence. Finally, like oh dear me said, they have resigned thousands of tribunals before the claimant was asked to speak. It is purely about making you jump through hoops. If theyve accepted evidence that already justifies an award, and decided that they don't care about that, then they just want to see if they can intimidate you out of what they owe by putting you in a room with a judge.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 19:25
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:I'm assuming - and hoping - OP is trying to write some fiction rather than sitting in the jury room waiting for our advice, in which case I'd say they'd be better off ignoring the above and just going with the dramatic option (complete with being shouted at by the judge). It's not Rumpole, but I'd like to be at least vaguely realistic in the judge's reaction (I'm tempted to have the police open a new investigation against the real killer, but have my detective still get a week in pokey for contempt because the judge is a dick.) I've done jury service in the past, but a lot of my memories of it have faded because of how boring the entire process is.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 19:51
|
|
|
Red Oktober posted:Have you been to see witness for the prosecution? It’s in an old courthouse and for each performance there are 12 “jury tickets” on sale where you sit in the jurors’ seats and actually decide a verdict at the end. It’s great fun. It's also a really good mystery. Top tier Agatha Christie imo.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 19:54
|
|
|
I did a couple of police line ups about 20 years ago. Back then there was a post inside the station where they would say what they were looking for and when to be at the station. Paid £10 a time. Then they went to an email service to let you know when they were doing them and what type of person was needed. As for getting chosen, they don't care if you are picked by the witness, only if the accused is chosen or not.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 20:03
|
|
|
There's going to be a lot of this sort of thing over the next few weeks https://twitter.com/MetroUK/status/1476514977779535877
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 20:58
|
|
|
An acquaintance of mine has gone ACAB after finally getting his
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 21:04
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:I remember reading about it and thinking it sounded interesting but that was in February last year and... It was absolutely super. Pricey for the Jury tickets but I don’t regret it in the slightest. I “got” the right answer seconds after I had given my decision as I suddenly realised it was the story that the Neil Gaiman story “a study in emerald” was a pastiche of. Red Oktober fucked around with this message at 21:09 on Dec 30, 2021 |
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 21:06
|
|
|
Tesseraction posted:Would love to see what people like this would think if black comedians started doing whiteface and making fun of bigoted old gammons. Now this is a good idea Jaeluni Asjil posted:Also, in the jury room, two men refused point blank to even consider the evidence because they said no way were they going to say a woman with a child was guilty no matter what she'd done or what the evidence. Some of the women jurors tried to convince the men how impossible it is that a puffa jacket, sheets, duvet covers etc could 'accidentally' fall down behind the seat of a pushchair with a child sitting in it at the time. Yeah if I somehow fell through a crack in space-time into a jury, I'd probably vote "not guilty" on any type of shoplifting offence or similar petty theft where nobody was hurt but some poor person managed to steal from The Man 
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 21:08
|
|
|
jaete posted:Now this is a good idea Congratulations you've invented post-Beverly-Hills-Cop-2 Eddie Murphy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 21:27
|
|
|
Has anyone got any experience with mobile phones that offer dual apps (eg two separate whatsapp accounts on one phone)? After nearly 6 years, I finally need to get a new smartphone but I do not want my work whatsapp on the same number as my personal whatsapp (so I muted the work group months ago and 'hide' online).
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 21:45
|
|
|
I've been using Samsung's dual WhatsApp functionality for more than a year now; works fine. Both WhatsApps coexist without being aware of each other.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 21:56
|
|
|
jaete posted:Now this is a good idea I'd like to think I would have a blanket "not guilty" response if the death penalty ever gets introduced, although if that happens they'll probably have done away with juries by then.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 21:58
|
|
|
ronya posted:I've been using Samsung's dual WhatsApp functionality for more than a year now; works fine. Both WhatsApps coexist without being aware of each other. Which phone do you have, can I ask?
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 22:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 00:38 |
|
|
Jaeluni Asjil posted:Has anyone got any experience with mobile phones that offer dual apps (eg two separate whatsapp accounts on one phone)? I'm pretty sure that any device that's been used to send or receive messages related to your job can later be searched by your employer on the pretext that you might have stored confidential information on it. Best to have a cheapo second device for work purposes imo, then you can turn it off and chuck it into a drawer at the end of the work day.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2021 22:06
|
|
