Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
    • S13 (2)The creditor may not exercise the right under paragraph 4 to recover from the keeper any unpaid parking charges specified in the notice to keeper if, within the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which that notice was given, the creditor is given— (a)a statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement; (b)a copy of the hire agreement; and (c)a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement. As  Arval has complied with the above they cannot be pursued by EC----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S14 [1]   the creditor may recover those charges (so far as they remain unpaid) from the hirer. (2)The conditions are that— (a)the creditor has within the relevant period given the hirer a notice in accordance with sub-paragraph (5) (a “notice to hirer”), together with a copy of the documents mentioned in paragraph 13(2) and the notice to keeper; (b)a period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the notice to hirer was given has elapsed;  As ECP did not send copies of the documents to your company and they have given 28 days instead of 21 days they have failed to comply with  the Act so you and your Company are absolved from paying. That is not to say that they won't continue asking to be paid as they do not have the faintest idea how PoFA works. 
    • Euro have got a lot wrong and have failed to comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4.  According to Section 13 after ECP have written to Arval they should then send a NTH to the Hirer  which they have done.This eliminates Arval from any further pursuit by ECP. When they wrote to your company they should have sent copies of everything that they asked Arval for. This is to prove that your company agree what happened on the day of the breach. If ECP then comply with the Act they are allowed to pursue the hirer. If they fail, to comply they cannot make the hirer pay. They can pursue until they are blue in the face but the Hirer is not lawfully required to pay them and if it went to Court ECP would lose. Your company could say who was driving but the only person that can be pursued is the Hirer, there does not appear to be an extension for a driver to be pursued. Even if there was, because ECP have failed miserably to comply with the Act  they still have no chance of winning in Court. Here are the relevant Hire sections from the Act below.
    • Thank-you FTMDave for your feedback. May I take this opportunity to say that after reading numerous threads to which you are a contributor, I have great admiration for you. You really do go above and beyond in your efforts to help other people. The time you put in to help, in particular with witness statements is incredible. I am also impressed by the way in which you will defer to others with more experience should there be a particular point that you are not 100% clear on and return with answers or advice that you have sought. I wish I had the ability to help others as you do. There is another forum expert that I must also thank for his time and patience answering my questions and allowing me to come to a “penny drops” moment on one particular issue. I believe he has helped me immensely to understand and to strengthen my own case. I shall not mention who it is here at the moment just in case he would rather I didn't but I greatly appreciate the time he took working through that issue with me. I spent 20+ years of working in an industry that rules and regulations had to be strictly adhered to, indeed, exams had to be taken in order that one had to become qualified in those rules and regulations in order to carry out the duties of the post. In a way, such things as PoFA 2012 are rules and regulations that are not completely alien to me. It has been very enjoyable for me to learn these regulations and the law surrounding them. I wish I had found this forum years ago. I admit that perhaps I had been too keen to express my opinions given that I am still in the learning process. After a suitable period in this industry I became Qualified to teach the rules and regulations and I always said to those I taught that there is no such thing as a stupid question. If opinions, theories and observations are put forward, discussion can take place and as long as the result is that the student is able to clearly see where they went wrong and got to that moment where the penny drops then that is a valuable learning experience. No matter how experienced one is, there is always something to learn and if I did not know the answer to a question, I would say, I don't know the answer to that question but I will go and find out what the answer is. In any posts I have made, I have stated, “unless I am wrong” or “as far as I can see” awaiting a response telling me what I got wrong, if it was wrong. If I am wrong I am only too happy to admit it and take it as a valuable learning experience. I take the point that perhaps I should not post on other peoples threads and I shall refrain from doing so going forward. 🤐 As alluded to, circumstances can change, FTMDave made the following point that it had been boasted that no Caggers, over two years, who had sent a PPC the wrong registration snotty letter, had even been taken to court, let alone lost a court hearing .... but now they have. I too used the word "seemed" because it is true, we haven't had all the details. After perusing this forum I believe certain advice changed here after the Beavis case, I could be wrong but that is what I seem to remember reading. Could it be that after winning the above case in question, a claimant could refer back to this case and claim that a defendant had not made use of the appeal process, therefore allowing the claimant to win? Again, in this instance only, I do not know what is to be gained by not making an appeal or concealing the identity of the driver, especially if it is later admitted that the defendant was the driver and was the one to input the incorrect VRN in error. So far no one has educated me as to the reason why. But, of course, when making an appeal, it should be worded carefully so that an error in the appeal process cannot be referred back to. I thought long and hard about whether or not to post here but I wanted to bring up this point for discussion. Yes, I admit I have limited knowledge, but does that mean I should have kept silent? After I posted that I moved away from this forum slightly to find other avenues to increase my knowledge. I bought a law book and am now following certain lawyers on Youtube in the hope of arming myself with enough ammunition to use in my own case. In one video titled “7 Reasons You Will LOSE Your Court Case (and how to avoid them)” by Black Belt Barrister I believe he makes my point by saying the following, and I quote: “If you ignore the complaint in the first instance and it does eventually end up in court then it's going to look bad that you didn't co-operate in the first place. The court is not going to look kindly on you simply ignoring the company and not, let's say, availing yourself of any kind of appeal opportunities, particularly if we are talking about parking charge notices and things like that.” This point makes me think that, it is not such a bizarre judgement in the end. Only in the case of having proof of payment and inputting an incorrect VRN .... could it be worthwhile making a carefully worded appeal in the first instance? .... If the appeal fails, depending on the reason, surely this could only help if it went to court? As always, any feedback gratefully received.
  • 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

12 week rule - Agency worker


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3909 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

Trying to keep this brief and have read a bit on it but still not sure.

 

I started work at the local council as an agency worker beginning of July - the council requested Level 3 (agency pays £8 an hour for this) and as the work wasn't too high level thought it okayish - not great but a job - no one else did this role and it was to help out for 12 weeks.

 

After 3 weeks I was offered a kind of promotion being in charge of Admin for the department and a chance that this will last more than 12 weeks - it's still Level 3 no hassles with that. What I am concerned about is that from my reading on the council jobsite is that Level 3 wages are 15875 up to I think 18500 - as my £8 an hour rate works out less than that, could I potentially ask for in 6 weeks the same rate from my agency that the council would pay a directly employed worker?

 

The agency did witter on a bit that I would get the same holiday rights after 12 weeks but no mention was made of comparable pay. I'm lucky my boss at the council is quite cool - I mentioned something about this to her this week and she said she would show me what the agency were charging me out for and I know she wants me to stay - so maybe I can put something together that I would be better on their books than on the agencies cost wise for the length of the contract.:oops:

 

If this doesn't happen - would just like to know if anyone knows where I stand after 12 weeks re what my wages should be.

 

Thanks in advance:roll:

 

Clare

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Clare,

 

the important point, of course, is that you work for the agency, not the Council. If you have been given higher graded work now, perhaps you should now be pressing you agency for a higher rate of pay, rather than in six weeks time. There are no guarantees that the work will be extended.

 

You could compare your agency rate of pay to what you think the Council rate of pay is for that role - it doesn't mean your agency will pay you that.

 

You might be surprised at the hourly rate you are being charged out at by the agency, and the hourly rate you are being paid; you may have some wriggle room to negotiate a higher hourly rate without the agency increasing their charges to the Council (and therefore you become more expensive to keep on). At £8ph you will already be on the full-time equivalent salary of £14,976 - not that far off the bottom end of the salary scale you mentioned.

 

Salary scales usually don't show the other salary oncosts that the Council have to bear - National Insurance and pension contributions - which work out at a approx. a third of salary paid out (10% NI, 20% Pension Cont.).

 

So where do you stand in all of this? I shall assume the agency charges you out at £15ph (I have no idea of course). I shall use rounded full year costs.

 

Clare..................£15,000 per annum

Agency Oncost.....£13,000 per annum

Cost to Council.....£28,000 per annum

 

Council Employee.....£15,900 per annum to..£18,500 per annum

Employer Oncost........£5,300 per annum to...£6,200 per annum

Cost to Council.........£21,200 per annum to..£24,700 per annum

 

If you can find out the agency's charge out rate this will make things clearer for you. In the first intance you will know how much the agency itself is earning per hour on top of your wage and therefore how much they could afford to pay you more. An extra £1 ph = approx an extra £1,900 a year to you (36 hrs x 52 weeks).

 

It might be cheaper for the Council to employ you directly on a short-term (rolling 13 week?) contract. You probably wouldn't be joining the pension scheme on that basis, so employer oncosts would be reduced to approx. 10% NI contributions. (Congratulations, as an employee, you have just become more attractive).

However the Council may have to pay the agency a 'finders fee' to take you off the agency's books (your Council boss would have to find out about that).

 

Get the agency fee rate, key all the other figures into a spreadsheet as well, have a play with the figures and you perhaps can begin to see how much more you could negotiate off the agency. I would be inclined to quote the equivalent hourly cost to the Council of employing a council employee to do that role (i.e. £11ph [21,200] to £13ph [24,700]) when negotiating with the agency - see what you can get.

 

I don't think it would be a good idea to tell the agency that you know the rate they are charging you out and see how close you can get to £11ph-£13ph.

 

Again, if the Council take you on remember you have some leeway to negotiate a figure towards the higher end of the pay scale as the Authority won't be incurring pension contributions.

 

It might also be worth insuring that if you do take a short term contract with the Council that they don't put you into the Council's pension scheme as a matter of course - as they will then deduct pension contributions from your (hard-won?) salary which will be of next to no use to you in later life.

 

All the best

Edited by SweetLorraine
Link to post
Share on other sites

You might find this article helpful: -

 

From October 1, those in agency work who complete just 12 weeks in a temporary assignment will be entitled to the same pay and benefits as permanent staff.

 

This is good news for temps, because, you could be entitled to more pay, annual leave and other benefits – so it’s worth making sure you know whether you are covered by the new rules and what you should get.

 

You will be covered by the new Agency Workers Directive if:

you are a temp hired through a recruitment agency to work for an employer

you are paid through the PAYE system

you work under the direct supervision of the company you temp for

Some 1.4m agency workers will be covered by the new rules – if that includes you, here’s a summary of what you can expect to get:

What’s changing from day one of my assignment?

From 1 October and from the first day of any job you are placed in through an agency, the company must provide you with the same access to company facilities and amenities as if you were a permanent member of staff. You will now be entitled to go to the o-site gym, crèche or canteen, for example, and should get access to information about any job vacancies going at the company.

Agency work: What happens after 12 weeks?

After you have worked for the company for 12 weeks in the same role, you will become eligible for some of the same rights as if you had been directly employed by the company. These include:

Pay

Overtime

The same pattern of working hours/ shifts

Rest breaks

Annual leave

Performance-related bonuses

What’s not included?

Other benefits, including pensions and access to health insurance are not included in the extra benefits temps will be entitled to.

What if my temping assignments are generally shorter than 12 weeks?

You will only be eligible for the new agency worker benefits once you have worked for the same company in the same role for 12 weeks.

If you take a break from your job, which is more than one week and less than seven weeks, then the count of qualifying weeks will pause, resuming once you go back to work.

If the break is due to sick leave or jury service, then the break should be less than 28 weeks.

If you are taking maternity, paternity or adoption leave, you will qualify for the new agency worker rights regardless of these breaks.

If you temp at different employers for assignments lasting 11 weeks or less, you will not be eligible for the new benefits.

Prepare yourself for what’s changing

Link to post
Share on other sites

you are a temp hired through a recruitment agency to work for an employer

you are paid through the PAYE system

you work under the direct supervision of the company you temp for

 

Hi goodatreserch, that's good to know for the future. Do agency workers have to meet all three elements of the criteria? If so, if the agency pays the temp - not the company, these benefits may not apply.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesnt matter if its the agency paying the temp or the company. The new rules apply. The exception is if your classed as self employed i.e.you arrange payment of tax/NI yourself and are therefore not paiud through PAYE. However note, alot of agencys will try to confuse you and not apply the rules. You really need to be on the ball and demand compliance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

Thanks for all your advice and especially the calculations you did Sweet Lorraine and that article goodatresearch - I now know what I'm been charged out at and I do know the finders fee rate.

 

Not done the calculations in full yet but I can see that compliance with the 12 week rule is going to be my best option at the moment for the length of the current contract - like I say my boss at the council is cool, I think she realises will be a bit of a false economy to get shut after 12 weeks and then train someone else up. I am PAYE so the self employed stuff doesn't apply - not bothered about pension stuff just want goes into my bank account to be a fair wage for the job I do so hopefully these new rules will help.

Edited by aliceinw
typos
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...