CSA Right or Wrong

LizzieS_2

Cheers Blob. Got it now.

pd001

LizzieS wrote: »

Cheers Blob. Got it now.

Can you put a link on here please?

kelloggs36

I have read it and I have not come to the conclusions that you have Blob. The applicaton was refused ie you lost.

kelloggs36

The third point relates to article 6 of Directive 2003/88/EC, on the 48 hour working time regulations. Blob (inserted to protect identity) says that it is unlawful to try to make someone work more than 48 hours a week, and that the effect of the decision of the Commissioner and the calculations they have done is to leave him with a liability which he could only meet by working more than 48 hours a week. Unfortunately again, that is not something which one can find in the reasoning of either the tribunal or the Commissioner. Both of them were conscious of the 48 hour point, and, as I read their decisions, recognised that they could not impose an order which had the effect that he would be working more than 48 hours a week. He (BLOB) says that the result of what they decided is that he was having to work more than 48 hours a week, but that is certainly not apparent from the papers and certainly has not been put before me in a way which the Court of Appeal could treat as a point of law.

Blob

How ever you want ot wrap it up it states that TAS recognise the fact that they can not pass an Order that requires someone to work more than 48 houres to meet it. If TAS can't then and they have done so on the strength of this, how can the CSA in the first place put one in? The simple fact is that the CSA dont like this because as stated judges follow it! The Judges that follow it are the ones that you have to listen to, according to you anyway. I have a letter that states that the judgments that are handed down by TAS are only suggestions, that was showen to a Judge and the CSA rep that was there was left in no doubt as to his thoughts on that matter, he asked if I would like the person that wrote teh letter to be summoned to his Court so that he could explain this to them. In my opinion the people that work in the CSA are not very bright and can't cope with the law if it is not what they have been told the law states, and when you actually quote the CS law to them they get abusive as they dont know what you are talking about, this has happened on a number of occasions to me and infront of other people, on occasions my MP and his agent, not clever!

If it is good enough for a Judge then the CSA have no option but to follow it.

As for the application failing, that is not the point, read the Judgment and try to follow it, I know the CSA dont want to believe this but the fact is that you are bound by the law, end off! You can't set an assesmetn that requires a person to work more than 48 houres no matter what!

Blob

Also that was my first time in the High Court on my own, I accept that the bundle was not put togeather as well as it could be, and that there was some information missing.

The next one will have it all!

kelloggs36

Blob wrote: »

How ever you want ot wrap it up it states that TAS recognise the fact that they can not pass an Order that requires someone to work more than 48 houres to meet it. If TAS can't then and they have done so on the strength of this, how can the CSA in the first place put one in? The simple fact is that the CSA dont like this because as stated judges follow it! The Judges that follow it are the ones that you have to listen to, according to you anyway. I have a letter that states that the judgments that are handed down by TAS are only suggestions, that was showen to a Judge and the CSA rep that was there was left in no doubt as to his thoughts on that matter, he asked if I would like the person that wrote teh letter to be summoned to his Court so that he could explain this to them. In my opinion the people that work in the CSA are not very bright and can't cope with the law if it is not what they have been told the law states, and when you actually quote the CS law to them they get abusive as they dont know what you are talking about, this has happened on a number of occasions to me and infront of other people, on occasions my MP and his agent, not clever!

If it is good enough for a Judge then the CSA have no option but to follow it.

As for the application failing, that is not the point, read the Judgment and try to follow it, I know the CSA dont want to believe this but the fact is that you are bound by the law, end off! You can't set an assesmetn that requires a person to work more than 48 houres no matter what!

You I'm afraid have misread the report - your appeal does not actually rely on a case which was based on 48 hours per week being assessed by the CSA, but you argue that in order to live, you have to work 48 hours per week because of the CSA. That argument was rejected as per the appeal court's decision - as I said earlier, there is nothing which the CSA do which requires you to work those hours - how you live with what is left after your money has been taken is entirely up to you - it is not possible to make you do anything. This judgement does NOT back up your claims, as it was rejected on the grounds that you argue. No assessment requires you to work 48 hours per week, that is your interpretation but not how your case has been interpreted in law.

Light_Speed_Cruiser

Blob, would you like a 2nd opinion? Im not a lawyer or the CSA so I can give a non biased opinion.

If you got to the High Court on your own, who did your transfer-up? (do you mean the Administrative Court?).

Is this a TAS judgement? or a ruling in the AC?

kelloggs36

Blob wrote: »

How ever you want ot wrap it up it states that TAS recognise the fact that they can not pass an Order that requires someone to work more than 48 houres to meet it.But what this judgement says is that there is no evidence that this is ACTUALLY the case - it is a hypothetical that they have agreed to, but you haven't given any evidence that this IS the case - the judge has said that he can find no evidence in your appeal of this, which is why it has been rejected. If TAS can't then and they have done so on the strength of this, how can the CSA in the first place put one in? Because you have misunderstood what TAS have said - they have NOT said that this is what the CSA are doing, merely stating that IF it were required for you to work 48 hours per week, then it would not be legal, but they have NOT said that this is the case. The simple fact is that the CSA dont like this because as stated judges follow it! The Judges that follow it are the ones that you have to listen to, according to you anyway. I have a letter that states that the judgments that are handed down by TAS are only suggestions, that was showen to a Judge and the CSA rep that was there was left in no doubt as to his thoughts on that matter, he asked if I would like the person that wrote teh letter to be summoned to his Court so that he could explain this to them. In my opinion the people that work in the CSA are not very bright and can't cope with the law if it is not what they have been told the law states, and when you actually quote the CS law to them they get abusive as they dont know what you are talking about, this has happened on a number of occasions to me and infront of other people, on occasions my MP and his agent, not clever!

If it is good enough for a Judge then the CSA have no option but to follow it.

As for the application failing, that is not the point, read the Judgment and try to follow it, I know the CSA dont want to believe this but the fact is that you are bound by the law, end off! You can't set an assesmetn that requires a person to work more than 48 houres no matter what!

...................................................................

kelloggs36

Read the judgement - I have quoted directly from it. It is perfectly clear that his argument has failed.