Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Sorry I didn’t think to come and update this.    So the outcome was that he went to court. Apparently the judge told the landlord off for not sending a letter before action but did nothing about it. He didn’t accept all the damages the landlord claimed, and told him off for accusing my friend of deliberately and maliciously damaging anything, and he awarded him small amounts of the damages he claimed for. The landlord had also made an awful lot of things up that never existed and accused my friend of stealing them, and the judge didn’t accept any of those claims.   However, I’m back asking advice now. So he made an offer of payment via the court forms, sometime before Christmas and straight after the hearing. The landlord didn’t reply so the court accepted the payments.  My friend has been paying the £10 a month each month. Then a couple of days ago he had received a letter from court with a hearing date in a couple of weeks, and a very irate letter from the landlord saying that my friend has consistently lied and that nothing he says should be believed, and that he wants the bailiffs to be called on him and that he absolutely refuses the payment plan. The letter is marked as received by the courts in December and this is the first that’s been sent since then. My friend and his wife are now panicked, what does this mean? And can they now get bailiffs sent round? He earns an ok wage, which somehow the landlord has referred to in his letter, but he equally has a lot of expenditure and can’t afford to pay any more. What will happen at this hearing and can they send out the bailiffs just because the landlord wants them to?    I have no clue what to advise him, can you help at all please?
    • Thanks Bank – I took your cynicism / experience on board and responded thus: Thank you for your response Mr Schnur  I set out my position quite clearly in my letter of claim and nothing has changed. Your insurance requirement is unlawful and is contrary to section 57 of the Consumer Rights Act, and also section 72 of the same statute. I would also refer you to the outcomes in PENCHEV v P2G (225MC852) and SMIRNOVS v P2G (27MC729).  My deadline for action - 1 May 2024 - still stands.
    • The other thing is that you are making a big mistake imagining that they are at all concerned about wasting court costs et cetera. They are only concerned about being obstructive and discouraging others.  
    • I have dad's last will from 2019 which mentions the trust. I am in the process of going through probate as the only thing that needs probate is a couple of shares he has (under £3000).  Speaking to my brother and my dad's wife they wouldn't mind going with another solicitor if we need to pay extra for the trust.   
  • 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

Possible Redundancy -v- Relocation Dilemma


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5479 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

Company I work for are due to relocate to a rural destination 40 miles away from current office (which you can only get to by driving as no public transport gets close enough).

 

I am 44 and have worked for firm for last 9 plus years and am therefore entitled to 10.5 weeks statutory redundancy money as a minimum (if I do not move). This entitled has been confirmed verbally by my employer but nothing been put in writing as yet.

 

There is 2 positions going at the new location but, once again, no offer of salary increase/compensation for extra travel time and costs which, in practice will work out to be 1.5 x 2 journeys and an 80+ mile round trip daily or 400 miles (£50 petrol) over the course of the week making a theoretical "salary reduction of £3K per annum for each of us after tax - not a particularly pleasing prospect.

 

Am I being unreasonable not to accept the offer of continued employment under these terms? Should I ask for extra dosh to cover travel costs instead and/or take the redundancy option as the alternative if no deal on salary can be struck with Employer - and what do I do about having none of this in writing and then employer changing mind at last moment.

 

Also, approximately 2 weeks ago a conversation took place between myself and employer fairly informally about the 9 weeks stat. notice period of redundancy I am entitled to but, surely, if no firm date has been set for the move my employer cannot rely on that conversation as the date "notice" was served on me for redundancy purposes, particularly when I had not given any indication one way or other (which is still the case as I write this) whether I would accept the move option, either on corrent terms or otherwise.

 

Would really appreciate some guidance as to how I can play this one out to my best advantage. The sad thing is if she paid out the redundancy and offered me a new "fixed term" contract of, say, a year to begin with I could probably then afford to do the travel although, in all honesty, may flatshare during the week as an alternative. Moving lock stock and barrel to the new location is out of the question too (I am married, own my own house, have mortgage etc. and do not wish to sell in the current market - hubby does not want to move).

 

As far as alternative employment elsewhere is concerned I am fairly confident that something will turn up for me with my 25 years' experience gained in various industries so being "out of work" is not my main concern right now - I just want to get what I am entitled to and not be "done over" by a boss who will not commit anything to paper re. redundancy (which, it could be argued I suppose, is not a true redundancy situation if she is offering alternative employment that I could take up if I was prepared to travel/lose £3k wages per year and run up 25,000 miles on my car I would otherwise not need to if I stayed put and looked for something else I could get to by public transport instead).

 

Help !!!!!!!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the link Wino (which I had already found and read for myself anyway btw).

 

However, you wil see that my OP asked for some opinions and advice re. strategy to be taken by me in the situation described, to safeguard my statutory entitlements (which have neither been confirmed, in writing, or denied to me in any shape of form as yet and I may therefore be worrying needlessly on that basis).

 

More specifically, would an ET view my refusal to move with the company as unreasonable if I did not accept the moved and it resulted in a Tribunal claim by me to get any £'s owed/denied at the 11th hour do you think?

 

Would appreciate some further feedback along those lines please - from anyone on here if possible? Maybe someone has been in a similar situation themselves (or knows someone who has been) and succeeded, or indeed failed on a technicality or something which, clearly, I would like to avoid wherever possible myself.

 

Thanks in advance for looking at this again for me everyone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

With regard to current travel - I do not use a car to get to/from work as I live only 2 miles down the road from the office and there is a good bus service which costs me £10 a week in fares. My employer knows this.

 

Also someone else affected by the move doesn't seem bothered about extra distance/expense of the journey she will be making on top of what she does now by train so, presumably, is not asking for anymore £'s to compensate. Can my employer rely on this when refusing to give me something extra though? I see no reason for her to discuss/tell anyone else at work what I've asked for and got (or not as the case may be).

Edited by kernowayr
extra text added
Link to post
Share on other sites

May have now answered by own questions here (but would still appreciate comments and feedback on how the rules translate to me as regards "reasonableness" or otherwise of me, the Employer, and my employer in the circs. descrined. I found this on a law firm's website and thought it relevant to post here.

 

Suitable Alternative Employment

If an employer can offer alternative employment and that employment is accepted by the employee then the employer can avoid paying redundancy pay. However an employee can refuse that offer if he or she is able to establish that it is not reasonably suitable on a number of grounds. The grounds for refusal must be clearly stated, a simple refusal for no reason at all would be classed as unreasonable. If the employer refuses to accept the employee’s reasons for refusal the employee may submit an application to an Employment Tribunal. The Tribunal will look at both the suitability of the job offered, and the reasons for the employee’s refusal of the alternative job separately and come to separate decisions respectively.

When an offer of alternative employment is made it must be clearly stated what the changes are to existing terms and conditions to enable the employee to make a reasoned decision. The offer must be made before the existing contract and position is terminated and take effect within four weeks of that date.

 

 

An employee is entitled to ask for a trial period if the job offered is of a different nature. The statutory period is four weeks, but this can be extended. All the conditions of the trial period must be made in writing prior to the trial period commencing. There can only be three outcomes of a trial period:

  • acceptance of the alternative job by continuing after the end of the trial period. There will be no dismissal and the employee acceptance of the alternative job by continuing after the end of the trial period. There will be no dismissal and the employee’
  • alternative job is unsuitable due to differences between the old and new job. In this case the employee will be deemed to have been dismissed on the original date within the redundancy notice and a redundancy payment is made accordingly.
  • the employee unreasonably decides that a suitable job is unsuitable or unreasonably refuses to continue with the job. In this case the dismissal will not be deemed to take effect on the original date within the redundancy notice and the employee will not qualify for a redundancy payment.

Edited by kernowayr
To highlight text in different colour
Link to post
Share on other sites

And this too (from another site):-

 

When refusing to move becomes redundancy

 

 

 

If you don't want to move with your employer, you may become redundant because:

  • the job at the current location no longer exists
  • you're being offered an alternative, but you refuse the offer as not suitable to you.

Whether you get a redundancy payment depends on a number of factors, including how long you've been working for your employer. However, the most important question is whether you've ' unreasonably' refused an offer of suitable alternative work.

There is no fixed distance which is 'reasonable'- it depends on your particular circumstances. If the new location is just a few miles away and you can drive or easily take public transport, it will probably be unreasonable to turn down the offer. If, however, it involves a difficult journey, even if it's only a few miles away, or affects personal matters like your family situation or children's education, it may be reasonable to say no.

When you are facing redundancy there is a right to a trial period in any alternative job you are offered - check the link below for more information.

Redundancy is a dismissal so you can always consider an unfair dismissal claim if you feel badly treated.

Edited by kernowayr
to highlight text in different colour
Link to post
Share on other sites

So, bearing all of the above in mind would any "refusal to move" on my part be seen as unreasonable by an ET (if no compensation offered or offer not confirmed properly in writing and subsequently acccepted by me)?

 

Let's have a poll - Reasonable/Unreasonable/Don't know

 

Thanks guys.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...