yep & we all know why now, banking slaves, once were all captives/ account holders they unleash the charges & terms! the banks instituted a type of poverty tax here in that if your account doesn't constantly have a balance of iirc �2.5k its in default & charges applied.
Can we just notice as above then let our employer hold all our funds because they are unable to eft to us until it is a substantial amount and then notice and demand property in lieu of payment since they have been negligent in payment?
an employer (in any capacity) must provide a NO COST means of transferring any compensation between the parties. if they can only bank transfer then you must be able to hold a private non interest banking exchange account for them to go through.
The government/bankers don't want cheques given to us that can have a claim attached to the back. They also want to eliminate a lot of jobs. An additional benefit is that we can't add terms such as paid in full in the memo section. Soon enough all paperwork will be online. Try writing void on a document that appears on your computer screen. :(
They know we are on to them. The answer? Electronic paperwork that can't be altered (laws against interfering or tampering) with a senders online document. :( It's coming.
My bank hasn't returned a cheque to me in years. I guess they capitalize on it (on the private side) and don't want me to see. I can get photocopies of the front of the cheque if I want.
My credit union has a policy that members may not cash a cheque. All cheques must be DEposited (as opposed to REposited) and then funds may be withdrawn. Anyone ever heard of a REposit account?
Good point Gail Blackman :). I've heard it said that the main branch of a bank must offer REposit accounts. I think Winston said that. I'd much rather REposit than DEposit.
As I understand it...Deposit makes "your" money of exchange theirs. REposit keeps "your" money of exchange "yours". :) The money has been posited to be yours. They have us go to the bank and remove that POSIT by DEpositing rather than affirm the posit and REpositing that it is ours. GOOD LUCK GAIL!
Hello Mr. Parker,
I wish to refer to your e-mail to Martin Hughes of this section earlier this week.
Since late last year this Department has been writing to all those in receipt of a Defence Forces pension, who were being paid by cheque (payable order), informing them that, under the Government�s Public Service Reform Plan, payable orders were to be abolished as a method of payment for Government Departments. All those in receipt of such pensions were requested to forward details of a bank account into which all subsequent pension payments could be paid. Reminders issued during the current year and as of 31 August a large number of pensioners had replied with bank details.
This initiative is part of an overall Public Service Reform Plan dated 17 November 2011 and under the heading Banking Shared Services one of the objectives was to �Abolish payable orders as a payment method for Government Departments with effect from mid 2013�.
As part of this reform plan the Paymaster General�s office issued the following instruction:
PMG Banking will not be able to accept Payment Schedules to verify Payable Orders after 30 AUGUST, 2013. Payable Orders subsequently presented without the backing of a valid payment schedule will not be honored by PMG Banking. Payable Orders are being abolished as a method of payment from 30 August, 2013 under the Public Service Reform Plan.
You will see from all this that the move to EFT is part of an overall Government plan. This Department no longer has the facility to pay pensions by cheque and so all pensions must now be paid by EFT.
You should note that your pension is awaiting payment pending receipt of bank details. The appropriate form was sent to you and you should complete and return this form at your earliest convenience.
For your convenience I have attached a copy of the bank form which you can print off and complete.
Regards,
Philip Neilan.
Pensions Payments.
PHILIP NEILAN,
YOU claim that YOU are acting on "The paymaster Generals instruction"
You will immediately forward my Notice to the appropriate Person in the Office of the paymaster General.
YOU will Notify me of the time and date passed and the persons contact information.
Since your Department cannot substantiate an obligation other than "it has been decided" i must know by who, i must have the surety and hold him liable.
I must warn you that if you are acting with any personal discretion in this matter that YOU do so under your own liability.
Authorised By
MICHAEL PARKER
PHILIP NEILAN
YOU are now in Dishonour, YOU have FAILED AND/OR REFUSED to make Pension payments due to My PERSON.
YOU purposely imposed a situation where you could not honour payments as outlined in your correspondence.
YOU will immediately forward the details of the relevant PERSON in the Paymaster Generals Office
whom YOU have passed my Notice to.
Failure to act on my instruction will result in action against YOU.
MICHAEL PARKER
the statute they're implementing can have no cause or effect if it breaches my right. I accept it was the paymasters instruction however i'm not clear on surety here. The implementation of such legislation by the pension section may constitute an unlawful order in this case... the guy i'm writing to is surety until he tells me someone else has accepted responsibility... still no response from him ;)
the only other solution I can think of is form a corporation a trust lien the legal name and that way they have to place the checks into the assets of the trust.
i'm doing it on principle, once Govt payments switch to eft so will everything, cash will dis appear.... & while i'm suffering without weed in the short term now.... how would i pay my weed man in a cashless future lol :O
S�il, I don't know if it makes any difference but I would have given him a time frame to answer in and then informed him of his default when the time frame was up. When I addressed an agent and used the "you" part I also included their name and capacity behind it so as to not give the option of questioning who "you" is. Not sure if it would change any of the circumstances you are in. Did you also send it registered mail?
That seems to be untrue Mark Momh�le Gr� Caulfield, do you get a tracking number with this method ?, can you track online with this method ?, can you print the proof of delivery with this method ?, do you have access to the NAME that signed as the mail accepted with your method ?
"Before you post" section from An Post website...
Ask for a Registered Post label at your local Post Office.
Declare the accurate value of the item you are sending.
Attach the correct postage on to your item.
Hand the item over the counter.
Your transaction receipt is proof of posting and includes the Track & Trace ID number to track your item.
**** If you require evidence to whom the item was sent please ask for a Certificate of Posting at the time of posting
This would suggest that a certificate of posting is an optional extra after paying for registered mail... No?
appears a pretty redundant service?? "
Recently I filled out this certificate at the counter and asked the assistant to confirm the name and address on the letter is the same as on the certificate and then to take the letter behind the counter, as this is the only way An Post can truly certify I have sent this letter, with a look of dismay this was reluctantly done.
After experiencing this I know a Certificate of Posting is meaningless,
I know I could register it at a cost and this would prove it was sent and received.".... http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?t=90795
my experience is someone else in the office will sign receipt, public offices appear just to give a first name when i retrieve the info from their site.
sorry had kids here yep it is the same same slip same proof same as just go to post office and ask them I wouldn't put it up if did not use it myself but hey its no problem in finglas post office got a look first time second no probs has track num and I can only assume it could be tracked trough the same service as registered