Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi welcome to the Forum.  If a PCN is sent out late ie after the 12th day of the alleged offence, the charge cannot then be transferred from the driver to the keeper.T he PCN is deemed to have arrived two days after dispatch so in your case, unless you can prove that Nexus sent the PCN several days after they claim you have very little chance of winning that argument. All is not lost since the majority of PCNs sent out are very poorly worded so that yet again the keeper is not liable to pay the charge, only the driver is now liable. If you post up the PCN, front and back we will be able to confirm whether it is compliant or not. Even if it is ok, there are lots of other reasons why it is not necessary to pay those rogues. 
    • Hi 1 Date of the infringement  arr 28/03/24 21:00, dep 29/03/24 01.27 2 Date on the NTK  08/04/2024 (Date of Issue) 3 Date received Monday 15/04/24 4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012?  Yes 5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Yes 6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] No  7 Who is the parking company? GroupNexus 8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Petrol Station Roadchef Tibshelf South DE55 5T 'operating in accordance with the BPA's Code of Practice' I received a Parking Charge letter to keeper on Monday 15/04/24, the 17th day after the alleged incident. My understanding is that this is outside the window for notifying. The issue date was 08/04/2024 which should have been in good time for it to have arrived within the notice period but in fact it actually arrived at lunchtime on the 15th. Do I have to prove when it arrived  (and if so how can I do that?) or is the onus on them to prove it was delivered in time? All I can find is that delivery is assumed to be on the second working day after issue which would have been Weds 10//04/24 but it was actually delivered 5 days later than that (thank you Royal Mail!). My husband was present when it arrived - is a family member witness considered sufficient proof?
    • lookinforinfo - many thanks for your reply. It would be very interesting to get the letter of discontinuance. The court receptionist said that the county court was in Gloucester 'today' so that makes me think that some days it is in Gloucester and some days its in Cheltenham, it was maybe changed by the courts and i was never informed, who knows if DCBL were or not. My costs were a gallon of petrol and £3.40 for parking. I certainly don't want to end up in court again that's for sure but never say never lol. Its utterly disgusting the way these crooks can legally treat motorists but that's the uk for you. I'm originally from Scotland so it's good that they are not enforceable there but they certainly still try to get money out of you. I have to admit i have lost count of the pcn's i have received in the last 2 yr and 4 months since coming to England for work, most of them stop bothering you on their own eventually, it was just this one that they took it all the way. Like i mentioned in my WS the the likes of Aldi and other companies can get them cancelled but Mcdonalds refused to help me despite me being a very good customer.   brassednecked - many thanks   honeybee - many thanks   nicky boy - many thanks    
    • Huh? This is nothing about paying just for what I use - I currently prefer the averaged monthly payment - else i wouldn't be in credit month after month - which I am comfortable with - else I wold simply request a part refund - which I  would have done if they hadn't reduced my monthly dd after the complaint I raised (handled slowly and rather badly) highlighted the errors in their systems (one of which they do seem to have fixed) Are you not aware DD is always potentially variable? ah well, look it up - but my deal is a supposed to average the payments over a year, and i dont expect them to change payments (up or down) without my informed agreement ESPECIALLY when I'm in credit over winter.   You are happy with your smart meter - jolly for you I dont want one, dont have to have one  - so wont   I have a box that tells me my electricity usage - was free donkeys years ago and shows me everything I need to know just like a smart meter but doesnt need a smart meter,  and i can manually set my charges - so as a side effect - would show me if the charges from the supplier were mismatched. Doesn't tell me if the meters actually calibrated correctly - but neither does your smart meter. That all relies on a label and the competence of the testers - and the competence of any remote fiddling with the settings. You seem happy with that - thats fine. I'm not.    
  • 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

removal of time off in lieu


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2163 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

Hi all,

I work in the NHS, when we work overtime there are two methods of renumeration, we can take it as paid hours or take it as time off in lieu of overtime worked.

We are being told that if we do not use our toil within a certain time we lose the hours owed to us.

This to me is the same as saying "if you do not spend your overtime pay within a certain time we will take it back".

I can't see how they can legally do this as toil is a renumeration for hours worked, exactly the same as salary is, could this be a breach of contract?

Does anyone have any thoughts on this please.

 

Many thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They cannot re take toil back.

In fact they cannot take ay hours off of you like annual leave you can roll over to the following year.

I'm a civil servant too and they tried this with us. Our union took them to tribunal and won

Link to post
Share on other sites

They cannot re take toil back.

In fact they cannot take ay hours off of you like annual leave you can roll over to the following year.

I'm a civil servant too and they tried this with us. Our union took them to tribunal and won

 

Sorry, but yes, actually they can they do - legally. YOUR employer is not the same as THEIR employer and the circumstances are different. Your advice is based on what your employer does, under your contact of employment, based on some specific points of law. The OP is not the same as you. What the OPs employer can or can't do is not based on what yours can do.

 

The OP needs to consult their own union, and their own terms of contract .

Link to post
Share on other sites

Contracts will be different, granted but they will have similaritys.

 

Our government contract states yo can only carry over 70.2 hours of annual leave to the next year.

This was challenged by tribunal and judged to be unfair as it reduces the remuneration and working time directive. TOIL hours were also included.

So on that basis the situations are more or less the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I did not think toil was classed as annual leave as you earn it for overtime so it is in fact the same as payment, also the point is that they are taking it away after 3 months if not used, most people are not being granted toil within 3 months as we are short staffed!

Do you have any details of the tribunal as this could really help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We are in the same predicament as you in regard that we build up toil hours and then struggle to take them for staffing issues.

Remember toil is hours you have ALREADY WORKED. So in effect they are saying take them or lose them. That means you could work for no pay.

That's the argument.

That's why it was put forward with the annual leave argument.

It was deemed at tribunal as unlawful even tho the contract said different. It comes under fairness and performance of contract and the work time directive.

Contact the POA

Link to post
Share on other sites

We will have to disagree then, because I think you will find that the OP will be losing a lot of time if they depend on this advice. The NHS is not the Prison Service, and the circumstances of the POAs case are very different.

 

It is, in fact, very simple for the OP. Do not "bank" hours. Use them. Or take the pay. The latter being an option very few people in public service have anyway. Three months is not an unreasonable amount of time to use up TOIL. There is no "end of year" deadline, as in the POA case, and that makes the critical difference. It was that deadline that made the system unfair, because people may have only worked the hours recently. That was actually the argument used. Had they had a rolling deadline, as the OPs employer is proposing, the tribunal would almost certainly have never happened.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The fundamental issue was the same.

Bank toil hours due to operational needs

Try to use toil hours but are refused cos staff shortages

Lose toil hours after 3 months

 

You state use toil hours or take the pay... You cant take the pay, you have to take the hours as leave.

 

The POA case was primarily with annual leave roll over but had toil hours as a secondary issue.

 

All I can say is to the op is contact your union. Our situation was very similar and you need to fight it. If we hadn't we would of lost it. We fought and won.

On a side note on your overtime, the POA have just won a case that you can claim holiday pay on your overtime hours

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, but it doesn't work like that. The fundamental issue isn't the same. Your situation was intrinsically flawed as a policy. Had the employer been cleverer about it, they would have done it in exactly the same way as the OPs employer has. It is entirely reasonable and lawful (to say nothing of being very common) for the employer to have a policy which limits the banking of TOIL, providing that the employer does not make it impossible to take the TOIL. Of course, in the POA case, that is exactly what the employer did - made it impossible to take the leave and then removed it.

 

I do, however, agree that it is more likely that the union may be able to limit or mitigate the policy - assuming, of course, that they haven't agreed the policy!

 

The underlying problem in both cases is that the employers have depended on overtime to run basic services because they cannot or will not recruit sufficient staff, so the accumulation of massive amounts of TOIL simply makes it harder to deliver the service, not easier.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On a practical note, it seems like taking time off may be best - have you asked them to confirm when you can take the time off?

Never assume anyone on the internet is who they say they are. Only rely on advice from insured professionals you have paid for!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you all for the input, i will find out if there is an agreement on removal of toil and also cotact unison because there is a policy which says toil should be paid if it cannot be taken for operational reasons.

Link to post
Share on other sites

my OH gets offered TOIL to be taken in the a/l period (NHS)

I used to get TOIL (education) which could be banked for the following year as well as some people liked to go skiing or holiday in New Zealand or whatever. a limit was then put on how much you could bank to stop people disappearing for 3 months Currently my holiday apy is paid out at end of year but due to admin cock up am getting it 6 months late. Used to have to take it as paid a/l in school summer holiday (I'm not f/t or a teacher so we dont all get the 6 weeks summer hols)but that got changed.

I short, what you think is right may not be as the rules change without much fanfare about this so check first

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's much simpler than described above:

You work overtime and cumulate toil.

Put a request for this time before the 3 months deadline and give them a good notice.

If they can't release you because they're short staffed they have to pay you or let you carry the tool into next period.

Losing toil when you have followed the procedure and asked for this time off in writing is a contractual breach.

It's as simple as "you work and get paid, you can't work for free because they're short staffed and can't release you to take toil".

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...