Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • love the extra £1000 charge for confidentialy there BF   Also OP even if they don't offer OOC it doesn't mean your claim isn't good. I had 3 against EVRi that were heard over the last 3 weeks. They sent me emails asking me to discontinue as I wouldn't win. Went infront of a judge and won all 3.    Just remember the law is on your side. The judges will be aware of this.   Where you can its important to try to point out at the hearing the specific part of the contract they breached. I found this was very helpful and the Judge made reference to it when they gave their judgements and it seemed this was pretty important as once you have identified a specific breach the matter turns straight to liability. From there its a case of pointing out the unlawfullness of their insurance and then that should be it.
    • I know dx and thanks again for yours and others help. I was 99.999% certain last payment was over six years ago if not longer.  👍
    • Paragraph 23 – "standard industry practice" – put this in bold type. They are stupid to rely on this and we might as well carry on emphasising how stupid they are. I wonder why they could even have begun to think some kind of compelling argument – "the other boys do it so I do it as well…" Same with paragraph 26   Paragraph 45 – The Defendants have so far been unable to produce any judgements at any level which disagree with the three judgements…  …court, but I would respectfully request…   Just the few amendments above – and I think it's fine. I think you should stick to the format that you are using. This has been used lots of times and has even been applauded by judges for being meticulous and clear. You aren't a professional. Nobody is expecting professional standards and although it's important that you understand exactly what you are doing – you don't really want to come over to the judge that you have done this kind of thing before. As a litigant in person you get a certain licence/leeway from judges and that is helpful to you – especially if you are facing a professional advocate. The way this is laid out is far clearer than the mess that you will get from EVRi. Quite frankly they undermine their own credibility by trying to say that they should win simply because it is "standard industry practice". It wouldn't at all surprise me if EVRi make you a last moment offer of the entire value of your claim partly to avoid judgement and also partly to avoid the embarrassment of having this kind of rubbish exposed in court. If they do happen to do that, then you should make sure that they pay everything. If they suddenly make you an out-of-court offer and this means that they are worried that they are going to lose and so you must make sure that you get every penny – interest, costs – everything you claimed. Finally, if they do make you an out-of-court offer they will try to sign you up to a confidentiality agreement. The answer to that is absolutely – No. It's not part of the claim and if they want to settle then they settle the claim as it stands and don't try add anything on. If they want confidentiality then that will cost an extra £1000. If they don't like it then they can go do the other thing. Once you have made the amendments suggested above – it should be the final version. court,. I don't think we are going to make any more changes. Your next job good to make sure that you are completely familiar with it all. That you understand the arguments. Have you made a court familiarisation visit?
    • just type no need to keep hitting quote... as has already been said, they use their own criteria. if a person is not stated as linked to you on your file then no cant hurt you. not all creditors use every CRA provider, there are only 3 main credit file providers mind, the rest are just 3rd party data sharers. if you already have revolving credit on your file there is no need to apply for anything just 'because' you need to show you can handle money. if you have bank account(s) and a mortgage which you are servicing (paying) then nothing more can improve your score, despite what these 'scam' sites claiml  its all a CON!!  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 160 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

unfair use of cctv footage


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5657 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Does anyone have an opinion on this:

 

I work in a casino, we have cctv coverage for crime prevention and to ensure the gaming is run fairly. It has never been stated by communication or in my contract that cctv is used to monitor staff.

 

However, a "random" check (from a spiteful tip off) has seen me investigated and possibly disciplined for a minor misconduct issue.

 

Is this fair? Or more importantly legal and proper usage of the systems?

 

My entire career could be destroyed by this so all help will be appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome to the forum.

 

Although I have no direct knowledge of the gaming industry, I do know that the casino is at the risk of loss as much from staff as it is from punters, both through direct loss and through the collusion of croupiers. You allude to this fact in the policy statement quoted that the use of CCTV is for crime prevention and to ensure that gaming is run fairly. I would take that to means that the crime and unfair activity which the CCTV is used to deter is possible on both sides. If an activity has been witnessed on the recording which contravenes an employees disciplinary code then this would be an unfortunate consequence of that, but would nevertheless be reasonable for the employer to take action commensurate with what has been seen. I don't think for one minute that an employee may understand and agree to being recorded on camera but that only certain types of misdemeanour caught on tape will result in disciplinary action. I know this is not what you want to hear and I am sorry.

 

Before we can give an absolute opinion though it would be neccessary to know the nature of the 'offence' so to speak. At the end of the day, you may only expect to be dismissed if whatever you were doing constituted Gross Misconduct. A more minor misdemeanour should result in nothing more than a warning unless it is a specific term of your contract that this would be considered GM. Also, what exactly does the company policy say about the use of CCTV - either in a company handbook, or on signs around the building? Has anybody else been disciplined for doing what you have done and what was the sanction?

Any advice given is done so on the assumption that recipients will also take professional advice where appropriate.

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

DONATE HERE

 

If I have been helpful in any way - please feel free to click on the STAR to the left!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for your reply. really the allegation against me is quite trivial in my (and other more senior peoples) mind.

 

i was not paying close enough attention whilst watching the casino. it was 5am, there were few customers (and i had delegated someone to supervise anyhow).

 

i understand your view on usage of cctv footage, but as i said it can only be used for crime prevention (i certainly did not commit a crime by any stretch of the imagination); to ensure gaming is run openly and fairly (certainly not debatable) and retrospectively in the case of gross misconduct. my offence is (very) minor misconduct so i believe the footage should not be used.

 

my concerns are why it has been used. i have learnt that someone told tales (there is no possible reason to view footage of a casino with 5 customers at 5am); and also the way the issue has been escalated into a matter that can (as seems designed to) ruin my career.

 

my punishment can range from a verbal warning (i am completely clean diciplinary wise) to dismissal, hence my concerns with such a range.

 

thanks again for your opinions

Link to post
Share on other sites

As Sidewinder says, I can't see why there would be any reason for your employer not to look at the cctv footage. I think you should perhaps concentrate more on giving a good reason why, it would appear, you weren't doing your job rather than looking at why they can't use evidence which appears to have caught you out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for your reply. really the allegation against me is quite trivial in my (and other more senior peoples) mind.

 

i was not paying close enough attention whilst watching the casino. it was 5am, there were few customers (and i had delegated someone to supervise anyhow).

 

i understand your view on usage of cctv footage, but as i said it can only be used for crime prevention (i certainly did not commit a crime by any stretch of the imagination); to ensure gaming is run openly and fairly (certainly not debatable) and retrospectively in the case of gross misconduct. my offence is (very) minor misconduct so i believe the footage should not be used.

 

my concerns are why it has been used. i have learnt that someone told tales (there is no possible reason to view footage of a casino with 5 customers at 5am); and also the way the issue has been escalated into a matter that can (as seems designed to) ruin my career.

 

my punishment can range from a verbal warning (i am completely clean diciplinary wise) to dismissal, hence my concerns with such a range.

 

thanks again for your opinions

 

You would be perfectly within your rights to suggest to your employer that you believe that an attempt has been made to discredit you, but I fear that to challenge the purpose of using CCTV and its role in catching you out runs a huge risk of being called a troublemaker, or worse, having something to hide. Whilst it may be true that their data collection policy statement regarding the use of CCTV could and should be more comprehensive, that would be an argument for the Information Commissioner about data protection rather than with your employer and their disciplinary procedures. An employer in investigating an allegation of misconduct would be entitled (I believe) to use whatever means are at their disposal to prove or disprove the allegation. What does matter and is crucial in the interests of a fair disciplinary policy is that the procedure is carried out correctly. To that end, you should have written details of the allegation together with the evidence on which they have based the decision to insigate the disciplinary procedure. You must be invited to attend a disciplinary hearing and warned what the possible sanction may be should they decide that disciplinary action is warranted and you must be given the right to have a work colleague or Union rep present. Following the hearing, you must be given the findings in writing, and a right of appeal if you wish to do so.

 

Once again, I have no knowledge of your employer, or the industry in which you work, but provided that the disciplinary procedure is carried out correctly, and any sanction is in line with company policy and action taken for similar misdemeanours with other staff, I do not believe that you can argue that their means of gathering evidence is inadmissible.

 

What exactly have you been investigated for and are they using the words Gross Misconduct (dereliction of duty, disregard for security etc)? You may in those circumstances argue that this was not the case due to having delegated that aspect of the job (providing that you had the authority to do so) and that this is nothing more than a minor misdemeanour (as supported by other, senior, staff) and an episode from which you have learned a valuable lesson. This may minimise any sanction to a warning and you could request that this remain on file for as short a time as possible considering your previously unblemished record.

 

Just a suggestion :)

Any advice given is done so on the assumption that recipients will also take professional advice where appropriate.

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

DONATE HERE

 

If I have been helpful in any way - please feel free to click on the STAR to the left!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...