Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have had a secondary thought.  I borrowed £s from a completely separate entity 6y ago. It was personal and unsecured. I was going to repay upon sale of the property. But then repo and I couldn't.  Eventually they applied and got a charging order on the property.  Their lawyers wrote that if I didn't repay they may apply for an order for sale.  I'm not in control of the sale.  The lender won't agree to an order for sale.  The judge won't expedite it/ extract from trial.  Someone here on cag may or may not suggest I can apply for an order v the receiver?  But could I alternatively ask this separate entity with a c.o to carry out their threat and actually make an application to court for an order for sale v the receiver instead?
    • You left the PCN number showing, but no worries, I've redacted it. Euro Car parks are very well known to us.  I've just skimmed through the titles of the latest 100 cases we have with them (I gave up after 100) and, despite all their bluster and threats, in not one have they taken the Cagger to court. You stayed there for 2 hours &:45 minutes.  I'm guessing the limit is 2 hours and 30 minutes, right?  
    • If the claimant fails to draft directions the court can order a Case Management Hearing to set them but normally in Fast Track claims the claimant sets the directions...Unlike small claims track which are always set the court.
    • Not Evris offer, the court offers mediation service.   All claims proceed to hearing if mediation fails /not happen.   Why do you not wish to attend in person to stand your claim ?     Absolutely you must comply with the courts directions or your claim risks being struck out. Preparation for a hearing should happen irrespective of mediation.   https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/460613-suing-a-parcel-delivery-company-when-you-dont-have-a-direct-contract-with-them-–-third-party-rights-copy-of-judgment-available/#comment-5255007   Andy  
    • LPA.  (I'm fighting insolvency due to all the stuff that he and lender have done).  He appointed estate agents - (changed several times). Disclosure shows he was originally appointed for a specific reason (3m after repo) : using his powers as acting for leaseholder to serve notice on freeholders (to grab fh).  There was interest from 3 potential buyers. He chose one whose offer depended on a positive result of the notice.  Disc also shows he'd taken counsel advice - which was 'he'd fail'.  He'd simultaneously asked to resign as his job (of serving notice) was done and he'd found a buyer.  Lender asked him to stay on to assign notice to the buyer.  Notice failed, buyer didn't buy.  So receiver stayed.  There was 1 buyer who wanted to proceed w/o fh but receiver/ lender wasted 1y trying to get rid of them!  Disc shows why. But I didn't know why at the time. In later months Lender voiced getting rid of receiver. Various reasons - including cost.  But there's a contradiction/ irony: as I've seen an email (of 4y ago) which shows the receiver telling lender not to incur significant costs and to minimize receiver costs.    Yet lender then asked him to serve another notice - again counsel advice indicated 'he'd fail'.  And he did fail.  But wasted 3y trying and incurred huge legal costs - lender trying to pass on to me. Lender interfered - said wanted to do works.  Receiver should have said no.  But disc. shows he agreed to step aside to let them do the works - on proviso lender would discuss potential costs first (they didn't), works wouldn't take long (took 15m), and lender would hold interest (they didn't) (this last point is crucial for me now - as I need to know if I can argue that all interest beyond this point shouldnt be allowed?)   I need to check receiver witness statement in litigation with freeholders to see exactly what he said about 'his position'. But I remember it being along the lines of - 'if the works increased the value of the property he didn't have a problem'.  Lender/ receiver real problems started at this point. The cost of works and 4y passage of time has meant there is no real increase in value. Lender (or receiver) didn't get any permissions (statutory or fh) (and didn't tell me) and just bulldozed the property to an empty shell.  The freeholders served notice on me as leaseholder for breach of covenants (strict no alterations).  The Lender stepped in (acting for me) to issue notice for relief of forfeiture - not the receiver.  That wasted 2y of litigation (3y if inc the works) and incurred huge costs (both sides).  Lender's aim was to do the works that every potential buyer balked at due to the lease restrictions.  Lender and receiver knew couldn't do works w/o fh permission. Lender did them anyway; receiver allowed.  Receiver remained appointed.  I'm arguing lender interfered in receiver duties.  Receiver should have just sold property 4-5y ago w/o allowing any works.  Almost 3y since works finished the property remains unsold (>5y from repo). The property looks brand new - but it was great before.  The lender spent a ton of money - hoping that would facilitate a quick sale.  But the money they spent and the years they have wasted has meant they had to increase sale price.  It's now completely overpriced.  And - of course - the same issues that put buyers off (before works) still exist.   The receiver has tried for 2y to assert the works increased value. But he is relying on agents estimates - which have proved highly speculative. (Usual trick of an agent to give a high value to get the business - and then tell seller to reduce when no-one buys.). And of course lender continues to accrue interest (despite 4y ago receiver saying pause interest). Lender tried to persuade receiver to use specific agent. Disc shows this agent was best friends with the lender's main investor in the property.  Before works this agent had valued it low.  After works this agent suggested a value 70% higher!  The lender persuaded receiver to sack one agent and instead use this agent.  No offers. (Price way too high).   Research has uncovered that this main investor has since died.  I guess his investment is part of probate? And his family want it back?    Disc shows the sacked agent had actually received a high offer 1y ago.  Receiver rejected it.  (thus I don't know if the buyer would have ever proceeded). He was relying on the high speculative valuation the agents had given him to pitch for the business. The agents were in a catch-22.  The receiver sacked them. Disc shows there has been 0 interest ever since (inc via new agent requested by lender). I don't think lender or receiver want all this to come out in public domain via a trial.  It will ruin their reputations. If I can't get an order for sale with lender - can I apply separately against receiver?
  • 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 5796 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 5796 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...