Latest news with #JillianBarrett
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Driver's $200 fuel cost exposes Aussie car hire company: 'Said it was our fault'
Welcome to legal column where lawyers Alison and Jillian Barrett from Maurice Blackburn tackle problems everyday Aussies face — whether it be consumer, property, money matters impacting relationships or work. This week, a holidaymaker feels ripped off by a car hire service. Question I booked a hire car through a third-party website for a recent trip and specifically booked a hybrid as we'd be covering a lot of kilometres. The booking said it would be a Toyota Corolla hybrid "or similar". The car hire place was a bit chaotic and they just handed us the keys and told us to find it in the car park. It wasn't until we had driven away that I realised it wasn't a hybrid. We spent over $200 on fuel and when I took the car back the manager was really rude and said there was nothing they could do and it was our fault for not noticing sooner. Is there anything I can do to claim some money back? Answer Booking a hire car can sometimes lead to unexpected issues and frustration, especially when the vehicle provided does not match the description promised at the time of booking. When you hire a car, you enter into a contract with the car hire company. This contract is based on the terms and conditions outlined on the website at the time of Bank of Mum and Dad warning over common mortgage issue: 'Seek legal advice immediately' Australia's most in-demand jobs revealed with $125,000 salaries up for grabs $1,831 Centrelink payment change coming within weeks Further, under the Australian Consumer Law, consumers are entitled to certain guarantees when they purchase goods and services. These guarantees include that the goods will match the description provided at the time of booking. If the booking confirmation stated that you would receive a Toyota Corolla hybrid "or similar', the car hire company is obligated to provide a car that meets this description. If they fail to do so, they may be in breach of contract or the Australian Consumer Law. Review the booking confirmation: Carefully check your booking confirmation and any terms and conditions (likely emailed to you) provided by the third-party website. You should specifically look for any clauses related to vehicle type and substitutions. Gather evidence: Collect all relevant documentation, including the booking confirmation, receipts for fuel expenses, notes of conversations and any correspondence with the car hire company. This evidence will be crucial if you need to pursue a legal remedy. Contact the car hire company: Write a formal complaint to the car hire company using their internal dispute resolution service, outlining the issue and requesting reimbursement for the additional fuel costs. Be sure to reference the contract and include all evidence. Escalate the complaint: If you can't resolve it with the car hire company, escalate the complaint to the third-party website through which you made the booking. They may have a dispute resolution process you can use. If your dispute remains unresolved there are more formal avenues you can pursue. The Australian Car Rental Conciliation Service provides a free mechanism for resolving disputes between disgruntled customers and certain car rental companies that have agreed to abide by the Car Rental Code. Additionally, you can report the issue to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, which oversees consumer protection. They may investigate the complaint, however won't assist in resolving the dispute or requiring a refund or compensation be paid to you. Finally, each state and territory has their own Civil and Administrative Tribunal which will allow you to lodge a claim against the car rental company to claim your money back. There is often a small fee to lodge a claim, so you'll need to consider the cost of that compared to your actual loss to ensure it is financially worthwhile lodging a claim. This legal information is general in nature and should not be regarded as specific legal advice. If you need legal advice, you should consult a solicitor.
Yahoo
7 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Bank of Mum and Dad warning over common mortgage issue: 'Seek legal advice immediately'
Welcome to legal column where lawyers Alison and Jillian Barrett from Maurice Blackburn tackle problems everyday Aussies face — whether it be consumer, property, money matters impacting relationships or work. This week, a father's concerned about a financial leg up he gave his son to get on the property ladder. Question My son built a house on land we gave him funds to buy. When it was completed, he and his girlfriend moved in. They have lived in the house together now for several years. If their relationship broke down would she be entitled to any settlement from the property? She contributes with the usual living expenses while he pays his mortgage. Could our gift contribution be included in a settlement payout if there was one? Answer Navigating property settlements following the breakdown of a relationship can be a complex and emotionally charged process. Hopefully, your son never needs to tackle this. RELATED Generational shift in Bank of Mum and Dad leaves Aussie parents $74,040 out-of-pocket: 'Very concerned' Little-known Centrelink benefit gets Aussie single mum $800 cash boost: 'Done in 10 minutes' $3 million superannuation tax change sparks property warning as 'panic' selling begins In Australia, de facto couples have similar rights and obligations as married couples when it comes to property settlement. According to the Family Law Act 1975, a de facto relationship is defined as a relationship between two people who are not married to each other but live together on a genuine domestic basis. Given that your son and his girlfriend have lived together for over four years, their relationship would likely be considered de facto under Australian law. If their relationship breaks down, either party can apply for a property settlement. The court will consider various factors to determine the division of property, including the duration of the relationship, the financial and non-financial contributions made by each party, the future needs of each party, and the care and support of any children from the relationship. A precise formula isn't applied (or a 50/50 split), it depends on the circumstances of the case. In your son's case, his girlfriend's contributions to the usual living expenses and the fact that they have lived together for over four years would be taken into account. If her financial contributions were intended to be rent and there is documentation to support this, then it could influence the property settlement. However, in most de facto relationships, contributions towards living expenses are viewed as part of the couple's shared financial responsibilities rather than a formal rental non-financial contributions she has made to the property would also be considered. For example, perhaps she assisted with painting the home or performed homemaking duties. Your son's contributions would also be considered, including the mortgage repayments and initial purchase costs. The court would assess both parties' contributions and may determine that his girlfriend is entitled to a portion of the property. If the value of the property has increased since it was built, that too is likely relevant when assessing her entitlement. Your financial contribution to the purchase of the land and the construction of the house could be considered in a property settlement. The court would look at the source of the funds and the intention behind the gift. If it was intended as a gift to your son alone, this could be argued. If you have clear documentation of the gift and any agreements made at the time of the contribution it may influence the court's decision in a property settlement. Without this, it may be difficult. The best option in this situation is for your son to immediately seek legal advice and explore a binding financial agreement. Properly drafted, this is a legally enforceable agreement between your son and his girlfriend that can be made at any time during a relationship. It outlines in significant detail how property and assets will be divided in the event of a relationship breakdown and also deals with things like spousal maintenance. The financial contribution you made to the property can also be provisioned for in the agreement. This legal information is general in nature and should not be regarded as specific legal advice. If you need legal advice, you should consult a while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data
Yahoo
12-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Centrelink warning over $631 cash boost: 'A bit dodgy'
Welcome to legal column where lawyers Alison and Jillian Barrett from Maurice Blackburn tackle problems everyday Aussies face — whether it be consumer, property, money matters impacting relationships or work. This week, a welfare recipient has expressed concerns about an overpayment. Question "I've been on Centrelink for about six months after being made redundant from my old job. I didn't get a very good pay out as I was casual and I've been thinking about training to make a career swap. I noticed last week that my Centrelink payment was $631 more than it should be. I've found it a bit daunting to think about earning less while going back to TAFE and this bit of extra cash could help me out. If they've sent me the money, surely I can keep it? Or is it likely they will catch me out? Would I have to pay any extra back as interest? The whole Robodebt thing has me a bit worried but I do know this is a bit dodgy." Stephen, Victoria. Answer While you might be tempted to keep the extra money you received from Centrelink, we recommend that you don't. Centrelink payments are governed by strict regulations to ensure that recipients receive the correct amount based on their circumstances. It is an offence to keep a payment that you know is more than the amount you should have received. It is a form of fraud. If you break this law then you may have to repay the amount to Centrelink, potentially with interest, and you can be charged with a criminal offence. RELATED Centrelink Work Bonus offers $4,000 boost to pensioners ATO 'hit list' revealed for 15 million Aussies as taxpayer's common claim targeted Tax, HECS, Medicare: All the major cost-of-living relief coming for millions of Aussies Even if you pay the money back you could still be charged with a criminal offence which could result in a fine, or even imprisonment. Other actions that could be a criminal offence with Centrelink include: Giving false or misleading information to Centrelink Knowingly completing a form incorrectly Receiving a payment that you know you're not entitled to and not reporting it Centrelink has methods of verification and systems in place to detect discrepancies. So while you might think you've got away with it, they will end up identifying the overpayment and make you pay it back. If you're concerned about the financial impact of repaying an overpayment, Centrelink offers options to set up a repayment plan that suits your situation. You can contact them to discuss your options and find a manageable solution. You've mentioned the Robodebt scandal, which involved the unlawful recovery of debts through automated processes. The Robodebt issues heightened awareness around Centrelink's debt recovery practices and the government has taken steps to address these practices. If you report the overpayment to Centrelink now, you'll be able to focus on your career transition and training at TAFE without the concern of a potential criminal charge hanging over you, which could impact your future career prospects. This legal information is general in nature and should not be regarded as specific legal advice. If you need legal advice, you should consult a solicitor.
Yahoo
02-05-2025
- Yahoo
Older worker rages after young boss excuses Gen-Z new hire: 'Discrimination'
Welcome to legal column where lawyers Alison and Jillian Barrett from Maurice Blackburn tackle problems everyday Aussies face — whether it be consumer, property, money matters impacting relationships or work. This week, a worker has noticed an unusual friendship. Question I'm in my late 40s and I got formally reprimanded after being late a few times even though I always had a good reason, such as childcare issues or bad traffic. Now, a Gen Z staff member has started and they're always wandering in late with a latte and my boss doesn't bat an eyelid - in fact, they often stop to have a chat with her. My boss is quite young and I think they're friends outside of work. Is this age discrimination?" Stephanie, NSW. Response In Australia, age discrimination in the workplace is prohibited under the Age Discrimination Act. It is unlawful to treat someone less favourably because of their age in various aspects of employment, including recruitment, training, promotion, and the terms and conditions of employment. There are two types of age discrimination: Direct age discrimination occurs when someone is treated less favourably than another person in a similar situation because of their age. Indirect age discrimination happens when a policy or practice that applies to everyone disproportionately affects people of a certain age group and is not reasonable in the circumstances. Your situation, where you feel you are being treated unfairly compared to a younger colleague, could potentially be age discrimination. However, you would need to prove that you are being treated differently due to your age, rather than something else. If your boss has made comments about your age while reprimanding you for being late, while a younger colleague has not experienced the same, this could be direct fact that your boss is friends with the younger colleague outside of work complicates the situation, as it introduces potential bias. Favouritism based on personal relationships can lead to unfair treatment and may be perceived as discriminatory if it aligns with other protected characteristics, such as age. You should: Keep records about instances of differential treatment, noting dates, times, and specific behaviours, as this evidence can support your case if you decide to take further action. Speak with your boss, or human resources department, about the unfair treatment. Speak with your Union, the Fair Work Ombudsman, Australian Human Rights Commission, or a lawyer for assistance. If the issue still hasn't resolved, then you can lodge a formal complaint with the Fair Work Commission and/or the Australian Human Rights Commission. This legal information is general in nature and should not be regarded as specific legal advice. If you need legal advice, you should consult a solicitor. Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
25-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Mum's $20,000 inheritance gift to charity infuriates daughter: 'It's our family money'
Welcome to legal column where lawyers Alison and Jillian Barrett from Maurice Blackburn tackle problems everyday Aussies face — whether it be consumer, property, money matters impacting relationships or work. This week, a woman isn't happy with her inheritance. Question "My mum died and left $20,000 to charity. I got the house and another $50,000, but that $20,000 could make a real difference. She didn't leave anything to my children. Can I take legal action to get that money? It's our family money and I don't see why it should go to other people." Nerida, NSW. Answer The death of a family member is always a difficult time and disputes about the distribution of assets can complicate the situation. The purpose of your mother having a will was to allow her to decide how she wanted to distribute her assets. In this case, it was her wish to leave $20,000 to charity, rather than yourself or anyone else in your family. RELATED Inheritance warning over looming $3.5 trillion wealth transfer: 'Disaster waiting to happen' Centrelink's blunt warning over $1,200 'one-off' cost-of-living payment: 'Be mindful' $10,000 pokies win divides friendship after holiday loan dispute: 'Dog act' If you choose to contest your mother's wishes, there is a legal claim you can bring in court, called a Family Provision Application, to challenge the will. The basis for bringing this claim would be that your mother did not make adequate provision for the proper maintenance or support of you or your children. It is important to note that the court will not overturn a will simply because you feel that the distribution was unfair or that the money should stay in the family. You would need to provide compelling evidence to show that the allowance provided to you, or the lack of allowance provided to your children does not adequately support your or their needs. In determining this, the court will look at your financial situation, the financial need of you and your children, the size of your mother's estate and the relationship your mother had with you and your children. The court will also attempt to understand the reasons behind your mother's decision to leave money to the charity. For example, did she work with the charity or was the charity's work aligned with something your mother valued? They will make a decision after balancing all of the competing interests, including your mother's wishes, and analysing the evidence. If you decide to pursue legal action, you should seek legal advice to understand the strength of your case and the potential outcomes. You need to be aware that the legal costs of making this type of application would generally be paid from your mother's estate. However, if you (or your children) are unsuccessful in challenging the will, you may be ordered to pay the costs of the application. With the potential legal costs involved it could become a fruitless exercise given the sum of money in dispute ($20,000) and the fact that a large proportion of the estate is going to you. This legal information is general in nature and should not be regarded as specific legal advice. If you need legal advice, you should consult a solicitor. Sign in to access your portfolio
