Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yes, Hotpoint UK has been a subsidiary of Whirlpool for over 20 years. And unlike some domestic goods manufacturers you can buy from them direct and I believe they employ their own service engineers, Is that your situation? You bought direct from Hotpoint and Hotpoint sent out their own engineer?
    • It's Hotpoint (but I believe they're part of the Whirlpool group now?). The part was bought direct from them as a consumer.
    • Thanks BankFodder for your latest, I'm in complete agreement on the subject of mediation and will be choosing to decline mediation, the longer timeline is not an issue for me, I will happily let the going to court run it's course. I really appreciate the support from the Consumer Action Group. I'll post the email text I'm sending to Evri's small claims in answer to their recent defence response. Regards, J    email text I'm sending to Evri's small claims in answer to their recent defence response:  
    • Sec127 (3) repealed, now gone. S. 127(3)-(5) repealed (6.4.2007) by Consumer Credit Act 2006 (c. 14), ss. {15}, 70, 71(2), {Sch. 4} (with Sch. 3 para. 11); S.I. 2007/123, art. 3(2), Sch. 2
    • We used to recommend that people accept mediation but our advice has changed. The mediation process is unclear. Before you can embark on it you have to agree that you are prepared to enter a compromise – and that means that you agree that you are prepared to give up some of your rights even though you are completely in the right and you are entitled to hundred percent of your money and even though EVRi are simply trying to obstruct you in order to discourage you and also to put others who might want to follow your example off from claiming and even though they have a legitimate basis for reimbursement. Mediation is not transparent. In addition to having to sign up that you are prepared to give up some of your rights, you will also have to agree not to reveal any details of the mediation – including the result of the mediation – so that the whole thing is kept secret. This is not open justice. Mediation has nothing to do with justice. The only way of getting justice is to make sure that this matter goes to trial unless EVRi or the other parcel delivery companies put their hands up and accept the responsibility even if they do it is a gesture of goodwill. Going to trial and winning at trial produces a judgement which we can then add to our small collection to assist other people who are in a similar boat. EVRi had been leading you around by the nose since at least January – and probably last year as well – and their whole purpose is simply to drag it out, to place obstacles in your way, to deter other people, and to make you wish that you'd never started the process and that you are prepared to give up your 300 quid. You shouldn't stand for it. You should take control. EVRi would prefer that you went to mediation and if nothing else that is one excellent reason why you should decline mediation and go to court. If it's good for them it's bad for you. On mediation form, you should sign that you are not prepared to compromise and that you are not prepared to keep the result secret but that you want to share the results with other people in similar circumstances. This means that the mediation won't go ahead. It will take slightly longer and you will have to pay a court fee but you will get that back when you win and you will have much greater satisfaction. Also, once you go the whole process, you will learn even more about bringing a small claim in the County Court so that if this kind of thing happens again you will know what to do and you will go ahead without any hesitation. Finally, if you call EVRi's bluff and refuse mediation and go to trial, there is a chance – maybe not a big chance – but there is a chance that they will agree to pay out your claim before trial simply in order to avoid a judgement. Another judgement against them will simply hurt the position even more and they really don't want this. 300 quid plus your costs is peanuts to them. They don't care about it. They will set it off against tax so the taxpayer will make their contribution. It's all about maintaining their business model of not being liable for anything, and limiting or excluding liability contrary to section 57 and section 72 of the consumer rights act.     And incidentally, there is a myth that if you refuse mediation that somehow it will go against you and the judge will take a dim view and be critical of you. This is precisely a myth. It's not true. It would be highly improper if any judge decided the case against you on anything other than the facts and the law of the case. So don't worry about that. The downside of declining mediation is that your case will take slightly longer. The upside is that if you win you will get all your money and you will have a judgement in your favour which will help others. The chances of you winning in this case are better than 95% and of course you would then receive 100% of your claim plus costs
  • 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 
        • 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

School has crackdown on girls uniform


my-spirit-soars-free
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3433 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

My daughter goes to a mixed school. The school has decided to have a crackdown on the girls uniform, obviously the boys all wear their uniform perfectly.

 

Yesterday the school sent a man (presumably a male teacher, my daughter did not know him) into the class to check the girls uniforms. He came into the class, told all the girls to stand up, and then checked whether the girls skirts were too short, or trousers too tight.

 

My daughter was really upset, she felt like she had been picked on for being female, all the boys were looking at her to see whether they could see anything, and she is furious that the mere fact that she is female was a reason for making her be checked (her uniform has never been an issue).

 

To make it worse, the school took all the girls that had "failed" to be taught out of normal lessons for the day, and girls as young as 11 were told that their clothing was provocative.

 

Any suggestions where I go from here?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It did. It always has. She is autistic and would no more break uniform rules than try to flap her arms and fly. How did that stop her being humiliated by having all the boys stare at her bum? (Yes, she is on the front row. Yes, the boy behind her made comments.)

 

Are you seriously saying that being a girl is enough to be forced to stand up and have all the males stare at your clothes? Luckily the Equalities commission don't agree with your view, and I will be going with their advice - I do not send my daughter to school to be faced with humiliation for merely being female.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

As a parent of two girls (fully grown now) I can understand some of your arguments.

 

I feel the school went about this in totally the wrong way and embarassed the girls in front of the class. This issue could have been carried out in a more sensitive way, especially with your daughter who could easily have had a melt down.

 

Your post did come across as a bit of a rant but if this is wrong, apologies however, this should be tackled with a calm head.

 

I suggest writing to the school spelling out your displeasure at the way this incident occurred and asking why, when the issue was about the girls uniform, this was carried out by a man. It should have been a woman and not in a classroom setting. As for removing children for something that can be seen as a minor offence is (IMO) wrong. There is also the issue of why boys were not targetted. They will flout rules just as much as girls (although they don't generally wear tight trousers and skirts :madgrin: )

 

Have you read the schools uniform policy? What does it say?

 

I have seen in my (very ) distant past where girls are put under pressure by their peers to wear the same things and also to hitch their skirts up once out of the home (this has been going on since the 60s) Not saying your daughter would do this.

 

In summary, complain to the school and if that falls on deaf ears, your local education department.

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

It sounds to me as if this has been extremely badly handled. In fact I find it quite scandalous – and I'm sure that most ordinary reasonable parents would do as well.

 

I think that this is one for the local papers. Which area are you in? Also, a letter to your MP.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you seriously saying that being a girl is enough to be forced to stand up and have all the males stare at your clothes? Luckily the Equalities commission don't agree with your view, and I will be going with their advice - I do not send my daughter to school to be faced with humiliation for merely being female.

 

 

No I am not and don't put words in my mouth.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with what the school did regarding dress length etc but they certainly went about it the wrong way especially sending a male teacher in to do the checking. I would write in tot eh school by snail mail pointing out the error of their ways but don't write it as a rant.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...