Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks FTMDave, I like the cut of your jib - I'll go with that and obtain proof of postage. Encouraging that NPE have never followed through and seem to blowing hot air, let's see where they go after this   Regards
    • Please see my comments in orange within your post.
    • no i meant the email from parcel2go which email address did they send it from and who signed it off (whos name is at the bottom)
    • I understand confusion with this thread.  I tried to keep threads separate because there have been so many angles.    But a team member merged them all.  This is why it's hard to keep track. This forum exists to help little people fight injustice - however big or small.  Im here to try get a decent resolution. Not to give in to the ' big boys'. My "matter' became complicated 'matters' simply because a lender refused to sell a property. What can I say?  I'll try in a nutshell to give an overview: There's a long lease property. I originally bought it short lease with a s.146 on it from original freeholder.  I had no concerns. So lender should have been able to sell a well-maintained lovely long lease property.  The property was great. The issue is not the property.  Economy, sdlt increases, elections, brexit, covid, interest hikes etc didn't help.  The issue is simple - the lender wanted to keep it.   House or Flat? Before repo I offered to clear my loan.  I was a bit short and lender refused.  They said (recorded) they thought the property was worth much more and they were happy to keep accruing interest (in their benefit) until it reached a point where they felt they could repo and still easily quickly sell to get their £s back.  This was a mistake.  The market was (and is) tough.   2y later the lender ceo bid the same sum to buy the property for himself. He'd rejected higher offers in the intervening period whilst accruing interest. Lenders have a legal obligation to sell the property for the best price they can get. If they feel the offer is low they won't sell it, because it's likely the borrower will say the same. I had the property under offer to a fantastic niche buyer but lender rushed to repo and buyer got spooked and walked.  It had taken a long time to find such a lucrative buyer.  A sale which would have resulted in £s and another asset for me. Post repo lender had 1 offer immediately.  But dragged out the process for >1y - allegedly trying to get other offers. But disclosure shows there was only one valid buyer. Again, points as above. Lender appointed receiver (after 4 months) - simply to try acquire the freehold.  He used his powers as receiver to use me, as leaseholder, to serve notice on freeholders.  Legally that failed. Meanwhile lender failed to secure property - and squatters got in (3 times).  And they failed to maintain it.  So freeholders served a dilapidations notice (external) - on me as leaseholder (cc-ed to lender).   (That's how it works legally) Why serve a delapidations notice? If it's in the terms of the lease to maintain the property to a good standard, then serve an S146 notice instead as it's a clear breach of the lease. I don't own the freehold.  But I am a trustee and have to do right by the freeholders.  This is where matters got/ get complicated.  And probably lose most caggers.   Lawyers got involved for the freeholders to firstly void the receiver enfranchisement notice. Secondly, to serve the dilapidations notice.  The lack of maintenance was in breach of lease and had to be served to protect fh asset. Enfranchisement isn't something that can be "voided", it's in the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 that leaseholders have the right to buy the freehold of the property. It's normal, whether it is a "normal" leaseholder or a repossession with a leasehold house, to claim this right of enfranchisement and sell the property with said rights attached and the purchase price of the freehold included in the final completion price. That's likely what the mortgage provider wished to do. The lender did no repairs. They said a buyer would undertake them. Which was probably correct. If they had sold. After 1y lender finally agreed to sell to the 1st offeror and contracts went with lawyers.  Within 1 month lender reneged.  Lender tried to suggest buyer walked. Evidence shows he/ his lawyers continued trying to exchange (cash) for 4 months.  Evidence shows lender and receiver strategy had been to renege and for ceo to take control.   I still think that's their plan. Redact and scan said evidence up for others to look at? Lender then stupidly chose to pretty much bulldoze the property.  Other stuff was going on in the background. After repo I was in touch by phone and email and lender knew post got to me.   Despite this, after about 10 months (before and then during covid), they deliberately sent SDs and eventually a B petition to an incorrect address and an obscure small court.  They never served me properly.  (In hindsight I understand they hoped to get a backdoor B - so they could keep the property that way.)  Eventually the random court told them to email me by way of service.  At this point their ruse to make me B failed.  I got a lawyer (friend paid). The B petition was struck out. They’d failed to include the property as an asset. They were in breach of insolvency rules. So this is dealt with then. Simultaneously the receiver again appointed lawyers to act on my behalf as leaseholder. This time to serve notice on the freeholders for a lease extension.  He had hoped to try and vary the strict lease. Evidence shows the already long length of lease wasn't an issue.  The lender obviously hoped to get round their lack of permission to do works (which they were already doing) by hoping to remove the strict clauses that prevent leaseholder doing alterations.  You wouldn't vary a lease through a lease extension. You'd need a Deed of Variation for that. This may be done at the same time but the lease has already been extended once and that's all they have a right to. The extension created a new legal angle for me to deal with.  I had to act as trustee for freeholders against me as leaseholder/ the receiver.  Inconsistencies and incompetence by receiver lawyers dragged this out 3y.  It still isn't properly resolved. The lease has already been extended once so they have no right to another extension. It seems pretty easy to just get the lawyer to say no and stick by those terms as the law is on your side there. Meanwhile - going back to the the works the lender undertook. The works were consciously in breach of lease.  The lender hadn't remedied the breaches listed in the dilapidations notice.  They destroyed the property.  The trustees compiled all evidence.  The freeholders lawyers then served a forfeiture notice. This notice started a different legal battle. I was acting for the freeholders against what the lender had done on my behalf as leaseholder.  This legal battle took 3y to resolve. Again, order them to revert it as they didn't have permission to do the works, or else serve an S146 notice for breach of the lease. The simple exit would have been for lender to sell. A simple agreement to remedy the breaches and recompense the freeholders in compensation - and there's have been clean title to sell.  That option was proposed to them.   This happened by way of mediation for all parties 2y ago.  A resolution option was put forward and in principle agreed.  But immediately after the lender lawyers failed to engage.  A hard lesson to learn - mediation cannot be referred to in court. It's considered w/o prejudice. The steps they took have made no difference to their ability to sell the property.  Almost 3y since they finished works they still haven't sold. ** ** I followed up some leads myself.  A qualified cash buyer offered me a substantial sum.  The lender and receiver both refused it.   I found another offer in disclosure.  6 months later someone had apparently offered a substantial sum via an agent.  The receiver again rejected it.  The problem of course was that the agent had inflated the market price to get the business. But no-one was or is ever going to offer their list price.  Yet the receiver wanted/wants to hold out for the list price.  Which means 1y later not only has it not sold - disclosure shows few viewings and zero interest.  It's transparently over-priced.  And tarnished. For those asking why I don't give up - I couldn't/ can't.  Firstly I have fiduciary duties as a trustee. Secondly, legal advice indicates I (as leaseholder) could succeed with a large compensation claim v the lender.  Also - I started a claim v my old lawyer and the firm immediately reimbursed some £s. That was encouraging.  And a sign to continue.  So I'm going for compensation.  I had finance in place (via friend) to do a deal and take the property back off the lender - and that lawyer messed up bad.   He should have done a deal.  Instead further years have been wasted.   Maybe I only get back my lost savings - but that will be a result.   If I can add some kind of complaint/ claim v the receiver's conscious impropriety I will do so.   I have been left with nothing - so fighting for something is worth it. The lender wants to talk re a form of settlement.  Similar to my proposal 2y ago.  I have a pretty clear idea of what that means to me.  This is exactly why I do not give up.  And why I continue to ask for snippets of advice/ pointers on cag.  
    • It was all my own work based on my previous emails to P2G which Bank has seen.
  • 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
      • 161 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

Can I go on holiday whilst on Sick Leave???


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5805 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

I have been off work for 6 weeks with stress related headaches. Six months ago I booked a flight to Spain for my annual holiday (this June) to visit my mother who lives there permanently. My doctor, who has been certifying me for SSP purposes, has said it would be a good idea for me to go as it would benefit my health.

 

My work on the other hand has told me that employment law says I am unable to leave the country (think they may have that wrong) and that they may invoke disciplinary proceedings if I do. They are saying that I would have to sign myself back to work for the period of my holidays, then go on holiday, and also provide a letter to them from my GP stataing that I was allowed to go abroad.

 

Can anyone with a knowledge of employment confirm that my work cannot require me to stay at home whilst on certified Sick leave, and that even if I did go, a GP would not issue a letter to my employee unless I gave my permission.

 

I think my work have got it ar*e for elbow !

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

nodebtnow

 

Welcome

 

Its a bit tricky this if you intend to return to work you may get some grief from your colleagues about going on holiday whilst off sick, however, if you are genuinely signed off it does not matter where you take your sickness, a few years ago you may have been sent away to recuperate, The only possible snag is of course is if your company is paying you full pay whilst off sick.

Is there anything in your terms and conditions.

Sharkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are your employers medically qualified? Does the fact that you are going away mean that you will no longer suffer from headaches?

 

Unless you have a unique contract of employment in that it states that you are only eligible for company sick pay when you are confined within the four walls of your house, then they can do very little. Providing that you have a sick note which covers the period when you are away then you cannot be disciplined. There is nothing in employment law which say that you cannot go abroad and they cannot make you report as being fit for work if you are not. You are going away with the blessing of your doctor who thinks that it may be of benefit to you.

 

What they are entitled to do is to question whether you are actually sick, and they can ask for your permission to contact your doctor. You do not have to give permission, but they could then take this into account in deciding whether to start capability proceedings. Your terms and conditions may also provide them with a clause to withhold company sick pay if you do not allow them access to a medical report. Of course if the doctor is willing to confirm your sickness and his opinion on you travelling then they would find it very difficult to argue.

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

Just to add to what sidewinder said about questioning whether you are actually sick.

For example, in your case the sun and relaxation could be of great benefit but you clearly can not work. But if you had broken you leg but you’re going on a bike holiday they could rightly say if you’re fit to ride a bike your fit to work.

If my comments have been helpful please click my scales

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are 2 ways of dealing with this. You can either get your doctor to say that in his/her opinion the holiday would benefit your recovery and then you should be able to continue on your sick leave or say to the company that as you will be on annual leave and useing part of your annual leave entitlement, its got nothing to do with them where you are. If you were still unwell upon your return you may have to get another doctors certificate.

Sidewinder is spot on. I once represented someone who was being disciplined for being seen in a supermarket whilst off sick:eek: We won the case because the employer had to accept that this person (who lived alone) had to eat!!

Lastly, if the company aren't paying you sick pay pay and you are only receiving SSP whats their problem as there is no cost factor involved?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Paul, cal and sidewinder...I thought my work were a bot OTT with this. I am still receiving my full monthly salary, so it is probably not just SSP I receive.

My doctor has no problem continuing to certify me as sick in the meantime. I would rather have no headaches and be at work, but the attitude of my work is making them worse. Anyway, thanks for the brilliant advice guys. Regards

Link to post
Share on other sites

One more thing however you may not have thought about: If you have travel insurance (and you should), make sure you make them aware of your problem before going and get confirmation in writing that they have been made aware of it! Should something happen to you whilst abroad, non-disclosure of pre-existing conditions could be reason enough for them to decline cover and trying to argue it out will give you a much bigger headache! ;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The matter has been rectified, and my GP clarified the position.

 

Basically my doctor has told me that it is none of my work`s business where I go during my period of sick leave as she has deemed me to be unfit for work only.

She added that if my work have any problem with that, they can approach my medical practice, and for a fee, can request a letter from her, to which she will tell them that my health is none of their business. Doctors are great!!!!!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

If it is stress related that you are signed off, doctors can "prescribe" a holiday for you, in other words, tell you that a stress free holiday away from what ever is causing your stress will help you.

 

2006, I was off work sick, not sure if I was just sick of work or what ;) anyway, the Occu Health came to see me, said in her report that i was "FIT FOR WORK" and that "THE GP MUST NOT BE QUALIFIED" and that If I did not return to work, then my salary should be stopped. I showed this letter to my GP, to say the least he was not impressed, as he qualified some 35 years previously and had practised medicine ever since. (I hate that term "Practised" :eek:) Well anyway, he wrote to my employer, don't know what was said in the letter, but I received a letter from H.R. informing me to take as much time as was required, and if I needed anything to let them know.

 

I returned to work few weeks later, and asked to see the Occu Health Adviser, but I was told she was no longer with us. Shame :(

 

So yes, it has nothing what so ever to do with your employer if you take a holiday, so long as it does not cause you sickness to worsen and extend your period of sickness.

Thanks

- Hobbie

 

--------------------------------------------------------

Under no circumstances should you speak with a Debt Collections Agency via telephone, request that all future correspondence is done in writing, a letter template for this can be located here.

 

Any views expressed are solely that of my own, any advice or information offered is provided in genuine good faith, and should be checked prior to acting upon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your GP may be wrong. What does your contract of employment state? In the industry where i work you cannot take annual leave outside the UK if you are off sick without permission of the company. Usually the leave will be granted if (as in your case) your GP thinks it will help. It may also depend on your pay, as mentioned earlier, are you getting full pay whilst off sick or SSP? Bookworms last post is very relevant too. It also depends on the type of sickness, if it was (for example) Deep Vein Thrombosis and you decided to fly they could question if you are really fit to fly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been off work for 6 weeks with stress related headaches. Six months ago I booked a flight to Spain for my annual holiday (this June) to visit my mother who lives there permanently. My doctor, who has been certifying me for SSP purposes, has said it would be a good idea for me to go as it would benefit my health.

 

My work on the other hand has told me that employment law says I am unable to leave the country (think they may have that wrong) and that they may invoke disciplinary proceedings if I do. They are saying that I would have to sign myself back to work for the period of my holidays, then go on holiday, and also provide a letter to them from my GP stataing that I was allowed to go abroad.

 

Can anyone with a knowledge of employment confirm that my work cannot require me to stay at home whilst on certified Sick leave, and that even if I did go, a GP would not issue a letter to my employee unless I gave my permission.

 

I think my work have got it ar*e for elbow !

 

Thanks

 

How long have you been employed by them?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was having a chat with my dr who is also a friend. I mentioned the above and he said that people are put off sick to 'rest and recouperate' and that time away from the home environment would be more restfull and aid recouperation than staying at home.

He also said that it was a complete myth that you could not go out or away on holiday when off sick, he even suggested that it was probably employers who were perpetrating this myth.

 

Also, employment law says nothing about not going abroad while sick.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The matter has been rectified, and my GP clarified the position.

 

Basically my doctor has told me that it is none of my work`s business where I go during my period of sick leave as she has deemed me to be unfit for work only.

She added that if my work have any problem with that, they can approach my medical practice, and for a fee, can request a letter from her, to which she will tell them that my health is none of their business. Doctors are great!!!!!!!!!

 

What a rather bizarre outburst from your GP.

 

Of course it is the employer's business to know where you are during your sick leave, out of courtesy if nothing else.

 

There are countless situations where an employee on sick may need to be contacted and, indeed, ordered to return to work, signed off sick or not.

 

You have stated your employer continues to pay your salary whilst your sick yet your doctor says it has nothing to do with them and, for a fee, she will tell them to mind their own business!:confused:

 

I would kindly ask my GP to not do so if I wanted to continue being paid by my employer!

 

Incredible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He also said that it was a complete myth that you could not go out or away on holiday when off sick, he even suggested that it was probably employers who were perpetrating this myth.

 

Also, employment law says nothing about not going abroad while sick.

 

I think you will find employment law does indeed address situations of sickness, going on holiday whilst sick and then getting the sack because of that.

 

Somebody with an, alleged, broken leg who is sick from work yet decides to go on holiday skiing is unlikely to win an unfair dismissal claim!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you will find employment law does indeed address situations of sickness, going on holiday whilst sick and then getting the sack because of that.

 

Somebody with an, alleged, broken leg who is sick from work yet decides to go on holiday skiing is unlikely to win an unfair dismissal claim!

 

I didn't mean there was no mention at all of sick in the working time regs, I meant in the general term as posted by the op.

 

Sorry for any confusion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5805 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...