We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
apparantely advisor does not have to prove it
Comments
-
sensibleadvice wrote: »Hopefully you'll do a better job of evidencing and quantifying how many jobs you applied for at your appeal. JC appear to have done a much better job of this than you so far.
yes i will on the appeal. i am not going into detail on here. I applied for some jobs and also about 3 or 4 on spec ones. Thats all i have to say. The question was abou whether the advisor has to prove their were 200 jobs available. I presume you dont know.:footie:0 -
yes i will on the appeal. i am not going into detail on here. I applied for some jobs and also about 3 or 4 on spec ones. Thats all i have to say. The question was abou whether the advisor has to prove their were 200 jobs available. I presume you dont know.
One wonders why you have such problems with the JCP with such a delightful attitude!
I answered your question above. The JCP has to prove their case on the balance of probabilities. Whilst it would be helpful to their case to present a list of the vacancies they do not have to. If they do not have definitive evidence and nor do you, the judge will decide which version of events is more likely to be true.0 -
As to who's side it's on, a tribunal will base their decision on what is presented as evidence from both sides, so:yes i will on the appeal. i am not going into detail on here. I applied for some jobs and also about 3 or 4 on spec ones. Thats all i have to say. The question was abou whether the advisor has to prove their were 200 jobs available. I presume you dont know.
Unspecified 'some' jobs + 3 or 4 specs with no evidence suggested.
Vs
Advisors will have access to jobs in the system at the time and be able to extract those 200 missed opportunities as evidence.0 -
Just out of interest - are people really expected to apply for 200 jobs a week (or even a fortnight). Does seem a little excessive ...0
-
It's not that hard for JC to filter jobs that match claimant criteria. And extract those as evidence. Plus it's a fair bet if there were 200 opportunities then there'd be a similar amount at any point in time.One wonders why you have such problems with the JCP with such a delightful attitude!
I answered your question above. The JCP has to prove their case on the balance of probabilities. Whilst it would be helpful to their case to present a list of the vacancies they do not have to. If they do not have definitive evidence and nor do you, the judge will decide which version of events is more likely to be true.0 -
No, they're expected to actively seek employment and may have a number of actions per week specified.Just out of interest - are people really expected to apply for 200 jobs a week (or even a fortnight). Does seem a little excessive ...
Of course the number of jobs they did apply for is important because it would show the context of how many they applied for out of how many they could have applied for. If that ratio is low or zero it's a good indicator of little or no commitment to actively seeking work.
Of course they'd rather not say what they have done for some reason, yet at the same time posted for advice on their predicament.0 -
-
sensibleadvice wrote: »No, they're expected to actively seek employment and may have a number of actions per week specified.
Of course the number of jobs they did apply for is important because it would show the context of how many they applied for out of how many they could have applied for. If that ratio is low or zero it's a good indicator of little or no commitment to actively seeking work.
Of course they'd rather not say what they have done for some reason, yet at the same time posted for advice on their predicament.
OK, fair enough. I was just thinking that 200 applications a fortnight would be rather shoddy in quality and would be rather counterproductive. Takes me a good day or so to write one - although admittedly I am a bit of a perfectionist.0 -
One wonders why you have such problems with the JCP with such a delightful attitude!
I answered your question above. The JCP has to prove their case on the balance of probabilities. Whilst it would be helpful to their case to present a list of the vacancies they do not have to. If they do not have definitive evidence and nor do you, the judge will decide which version of events is more likely to be true.
That wasnt aimed at you:footie:0 -
sensibleadvice wrote: »Tbh, if big breasts allegation is the best you can come up with at tribunal you'll be making a bit of at it of yourself.
It was just an example about saying something without proof. You cant go to court and say things without evidence why is it different for the jc staff.:footie:0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.7K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454K Spending & Discounts
- 244.7K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.3K Life & Family
- 258.3K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards