Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks FTMDave, I like the cut of your jib - I'll go with that and obtain proof of postage. Encouraging that NPE have never followed through and seem to blowing hot air, let's see where they go after this   Regards
    • Please see my comments in orange within your post.
    • no i meant the email from parcel2go which email address did they send it from and who signed it off (whos name is at the bottom)
    • I understand confusion with this thread.  I tried to keep threads separate because there have been so many angles.    But a team member merged them all.  This is why it's hard to keep track. This forum exists to help little people fight injustice - however big or small.  Im here to try get a decent resolution. Not to give in to the ' big boys'. My "matter' became complicated 'matters' simply because a lender refused to sell a property. What can I say?  I'll try in a nutshell to give an overview: There's a long lease property. I originally bought it short lease with a s.146 on it from original freeholder.  I had no concerns. So lender should have been able to sell a well-maintained lovely long lease property.  The property was great. The issue is not the property.  Economy, sdlt increases, elections, brexit, covid, interest hikes etc didn't help.  The issue is simple - the lender wanted to keep it.   House or Flat? Before repo I offered to clear my loan.  I was a bit short and lender refused.  They said (recorded) they thought the property was worth much more and they were happy to keep accruing interest (in their benefit) until it reached a point where they felt they could repo and still easily quickly sell to get their £s back.  This was a mistake.  The market was (and is) tough.   2y later the lender ceo bid the same sum to buy the property for himself. He'd rejected higher offers in the intervening period whilst accruing interest. Lenders have a legal obligation to sell the property for the best price they can get. If they feel the offer is low they won't sell it, because it's likely the borrower will say the same. I had the property under offer to a fantastic niche buyer but lender rushed to repo and buyer got spooked and walked.  It had taken a long time to find such a lucrative buyer.  A sale which would have resulted in £s and another asset for me. Post repo lender had 1 offer immediately.  But dragged out the process for >1y - allegedly trying to get other offers. But disclosure shows there was only one valid buyer. Again, points as above. Lender appointed receiver (after 4 months) - simply to try acquire the freehold.  He used his powers as receiver to use me, as leaseholder, to serve notice on freeholders.  Legally that failed. Meanwhile lender failed to secure property - and squatters got in (3 times).  And they failed to maintain it.  So freeholders served a dilapidations notice (external) - on me as leaseholder (cc-ed to lender).   (That's how it works legally) Why serve a delapidations notice? If it's in the terms of the lease to maintain the property to a good standard, then serve an S146 notice instead as it's a clear breach of the lease. I don't own the freehold.  But I am a trustee and have to do right by the freeholders.  This is where matters got/ get complicated.  And probably lose most caggers.   Lawyers got involved for the freeholders to firstly void the receiver enfranchisement notice. Secondly, to serve the dilapidations notice.  The lack of maintenance was in breach of lease and had to be served to protect fh asset. Enfranchisement isn't something that can be "voided", it's in the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 that leaseholders have the right to buy the freehold of the property. It's normal, whether it is a "normal" leaseholder or a repossession with a leasehold house, to claim this right of enfranchisement and sell the property with said rights attached and the purchase price of the freehold included in the final completion price. That's likely what the mortgage provider wished to do. The lender did no repairs. They said a buyer would undertake them. Which was probably correct. If they had sold. After 1y lender finally agreed to sell to the 1st offeror and contracts went with lawyers.  Within 1 month lender reneged.  Lender tried to suggest buyer walked. Evidence shows he/ his lawyers continued trying to exchange (cash) for 4 months.  Evidence shows lender and receiver strategy had been to renege and for ceo to take control.   I still think that's their plan. Redact and scan said evidence up for others to look at? Lender then stupidly chose to pretty much bulldoze the property.  Other stuff was going on in the background. After repo I was in touch by phone and email and lender knew post got to me.   Despite this, after about 10 months (before and then during covid), they deliberately sent SDs and eventually a B petition to an incorrect address and an obscure small court.  They never served me properly.  (In hindsight I understand they hoped to get a backdoor B - so they could keep the property that way.)  Eventually the random court told them to email me by way of service.  At this point their ruse to make me B failed.  I got a lawyer (friend paid). The B petition was struck out. They’d failed to include the property as an asset. They were in breach of insolvency rules. So this is dealt with then. Simultaneously the receiver again appointed lawyers to act on my behalf as leaseholder. This time to serve notice on the freeholders for a lease extension.  He had hoped to try and vary the strict lease. Evidence shows the already long length of lease wasn't an issue.  The lender obviously hoped to get round their lack of permission to do works (which they were already doing) by hoping to remove the strict clauses that prevent leaseholder doing alterations.  You wouldn't vary a lease through a lease extension. You'd need a Deed of Variation for that. This may be done at the same time but the lease has already been extended once and that's all they have a right to. The extension created a new legal angle for me to deal with.  I had to act as trustee for freeholders against me as leaseholder/ the receiver.  Inconsistencies and incompetence by receiver lawyers dragged this out 3y.  It still isn't properly resolved. The lease has already been extended once so they have no right to another extension. It seems pretty easy to just get the lawyer to say no and stick by those terms as the law is on your side there. Meanwhile - going back to the the works the lender undertook. The works were consciously in breach of lease.  The lender hadn't remedied the breaches listed in the dilapidations notice.  They destroyed the property.  The trustees compiled all evidence.  The freeholders lawyers then served a forfeiture notice. This notice started a different legal battle. I was acting for the freeholders against what the lender had done on my behalf as leaseholder.  This legal battle took 3y to resolve. Again, order them to revert it as they didn't have permission to do the works, or else serve an S146 notice for breach of the lease. The simple exit would have been for lender to sell. A simple agreement to remedy the breaches and recompense the freeholders in compensation - and there's have been clean title to sell.  That option was proposed to them.   This happened by way of mediation for all parties 2y ago.  A resolution option was put forward and in principle agreed.  But immediately after the lender lawyers failed to engage.  A hard lesson to learn - mediation cannot be referred to in court. It's considered w/o prejudice. The steps they took have made no difference to their ability to sell the property.  Almost 3y since they finished works they still haven't sold. ** ** I followed up some leads myself.  A qualified cash buyer offered me a substantial sum.  The lender and receiver both refused it.   I found another offer in disclosure.  6 months later someone had apparently offered a substantial sum via an agent.  The receiver again rejected it.  The problem of course was that the agent had inflated the market price to get the business. But no-one was or is ever going to offer their list price.  Yet the receiver wanted/wants to hold out for the list price.  Which means 1y later not only has it not sold - disclosure shows few viewings and zero interest.  It's transparently over-priced.  And tarnished. For those asking why I don't give up - I couldn't/ can't.  Firstly I have fiduciary duties as a trustee. Secondly, legal advice indicates I (as leaseholder) could succeed with a large compensation claim v the lender.  Also - I started a claim v my old lawyer and the firm immediately reimbursed some £s. That was encouraging.  And a sign to continue.  So I'm going for compensation.  I had finance in place (via friend) to do a deal and take the property back off the lender - and that lawyer messed up bad.   He should have done a deal.  Instead further years have been wasted.   Maybe I only get back my lost savings - but that will be a result.   If I can add some kind of complaint/ claim v the receiver's conscious impropriety I will do so.   I have been left with nothing - so fighting for something is worth it. The lender wants to talk re a form of settlement.  Similar to my proposal 2y ago.  I have a pretty clear idea of what that means to me.  This is exactly why I do not give up.  And why I continue to ask for snippets of advice/ pointers on cag.  
    • It was all my own work based on my previous emails to P2G which Bank has seen.
  • 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

Social Media & Employment Guidelines


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3798 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

We are, unsurprisingly as their usage getting a lot of employment problems regarding social media such as Facebook, so I was wondering if we could maybe put together a little stickied guide on the do's and don'ts?

 

My thoughts, based on how I use FB for example would be:

 

Put your Privacy Settings on Maximum.

 

That includes setting it so that your profile does not display in searched by your name or email address.

 

No matter how well you feel you get on, no matter how long you have worked alongside people, do not add them to your Facebook friends list. Especially don't add Managers :-D

 

Don't add the company you are currently working for to your profile, just in case that gives them a way to get even a glimpse of your profile.

 

I have created an album with several screenshots to show what maximum privacy settings look like

 

http://s107.photobucket.com/albums/m309/prw2005/Facebook%20Screenshots/

 

Just to add, this is what my Profile looks like to a non friend - as you can see, my wall, interests, photo's, everything is blank, not even my friends list appears, there is literally nothing to identify who I am, especially as I have an extremely common name, and don't use my middle name on FB :-D

 

Basically all anyone who is not on my friends list can discern (and remember my profile has been set so I do not show up in name OR email addresses) so they wont even find the profile anyway, is that I am Male! Thats it. Thats all your employer should see too.

 

public.png

Edited by caledfwlch

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sound advice, unfortunately by the time people get to here its sometimes too late!

I am not a legal professional or adviser, I am however a Law Student and very well versed areas of Employment Law. Anything I write here is purely from my own experiences! If I help, then click the star to add to my reputation :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, don't make wall posts about work, ever. Just. Don't. Do. It. You might think it's funny at the time, but when someone has screen-capped it and sent it to the MD, the amusement wears off pretty quickly.

 

Before you post anything, think about how it "sounds" in type versus how it sounds when you say it out loud. When you're using social media, the person on the receiving end doesn't have the benefit of your facial expression, body language or tone of voice. What might be funny and lighthearted in person can seem distinctly different when it's in writing.

 

Most of all, remember once you've put something on a SM profile, it can be recoverable even if you delete it, not least because some people will quite happily screen cap and save questionable postings (and believe me, this does happen). There is very little chance of denying or mitigating down something that you've put in writing!

 

In 20 years of working life, I have never known any one factor to generate as many warnings, grievances, disciplinary meetings and actual sackings as social media.

"Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me". Martin Niemöller

 

"A vital ingredient of success is not knowing that what you're attempting can't be done. A person ignorant of the possibility of failure can be a half-brick in the path of the bicycle of history". - Terry Pratchett

 

If I've been helpful, please click my star. :oops:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good resource.Will make this a stickie.

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh yes...I know this might seem obvious, but if you DO decide to add work colleagues, don't go within 10 feet of a keyboard if you've had a couple of drinks. I've seen this cause a variety of trouble from a message intended for a spouse being sent to the wrong person (!), to allegations of alcoholism. :|

"Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me". Martin Niemöller

 

"A vital ingredient of success is not knowing that what you're attempting can't be done. A person ignorant of the possibility of failure can be a half-brick in the path of the bicycle of history". - Terry Pratchett

 

If I've been helpful, please click my star. :oops:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

This sound really wise on the one hand, however I am wondering whether it makes any sense at all to be on there then, if no one can find me etc.

 

Would it not be just easier to not have a profile at all?

 

I also have a question.

 

My employer asked a few of us to become community managers and so I now have two profiles, both with the same photos, one is my own and the other is an upgraded account that is paid for by the company.

 

My job with relation to this was to collect contacts that are relevant to my job and the business.

 

I have now handed in my notice and would like them to remove that profile as I will not be working there any longer.

 

Does anyone know what are the legal requirements for them to remove my profile and stop using my name and photo please?

 

As far as I am aware the company does not have a social media policy for employees, as such so it was dealt with on a more ad hoc basis.

 

Any advice would be much appreciated.

 

Thank you.

 

Mariann

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,this should be relatively straightforward.

Simply advise them that you remove all permissions and will rely on the Data Protection Act for their compliance.

You can do this by writing a formal letter,or else serving them a section 10 notice under the DPA.

There is a template of this in the CAG library.

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hi All

 

Can't find the letter in the library and the company I used to work for is still using my name and photo.

 

Could someone tell me which letter to send please

 

Many thanks,

 

Mariann

 

Hello,this should be relatively straightforward.

Simply advise them that you remove all permissions and will rely on the Data Protection Act for their compliance.

You can do this by writing a formal letter,or else serving them a section 10 notice under the DPA.

There is a template of this in the CAG library.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

A word of warning, my facebook privacy settings were set to private. I worked for a well known charitable advice agency, and after 7 months was pulled into a disciplinary, and shown a snapshot of my wall, where there was an article on the BBC posted about the lifting of regulations for EU nationals from certain countries allowing them to have access to public funds. I must have liked it on the BBC page, and it showed up on my wall that morning along with the comments left on the BBC website from others. The correct procedure was not followed with the meeting, ie I was just told to bob in for a chat a few seconds before, was not warned beforehand etc. I didnt even have my glasses so couldnt see the article properly. I have done employment law at Uni, and knew that this was wrong. I denied having any racist feelings, but the HR accused me as such. Made me make a statement where I denied putting it on my wall, and when I told her my wall was private anyway she showed me on her wall how she had accessed the information, A snapshot appears when you access through a mutual friend! This was a clear invasion of my privacy and I have made numerous complaints to the head of the charity itself, as my work record was more than impeccable. We were facing redundancies next month, and I believe it was a ploy to get rid of me with no notice.

 

I submitted evidence that facebook can post on your behalf, when you like an article, and also that the privacy settings were set to private, but I was told by my boss, I had to resign or face a second interview the next day where the likelihood was that I would be fired for gross misconduct for being racist. All totally wrong from an organisation that advises others every day on employment rights!

 

I couldnt afford to have this on my record as I am newly qualified,and have just spend years getting my law degree after my divorce. I did not want to jeopardise my work record, and after getting upset resigned. I did not sign the letter, and my immediate bosses told me their hands were tied by the HR dept, who they outsource to. I have retained a good reference.

 

I am currently trying to get some pro bono assistance to help me take this further, as I hadnt been there 2 years I have no claim in the Emp Tribunal, unless they will bend and allow it under the Equality Act, however I possibly do have one against the government because they failed to give me adequate protection against freedom of expressing my political views in an ET court after a recent ruling said that article 11 covers freedom of political expression as well as religious. Just need help as its out of my league as an advisor..

So be careful what you put on your wall and NEVER trust work colleagues as they may be your friends, but when push comes to shove and they are faced with them or us situation in redundancy they may choose to cover their own backs and stab you in yours!

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is more than one FB privacy setting and it sounds like yours is set to "friends of friends."

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

It says only friends on the privacy settings, Ive since checked it again, its definately friends. Yet the print out says 2 mutual friends, on the side and it gives a snapshot of the last few posts and details of me, that should have been private. Just want to warn others to be careful, apparently its the biggest area of reasons for misconduct at the moment, and with the new employment laws last year, anyone with less than 2 years service from April 12 cannot raise a claim in the Employment Tribunals, unless its covered under special circs..

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no such thing as privacy - anywhere - on the internet. You must always consider that ANYTHING, even if made behind the mask of a privacy setting on Facebook, can potentially be seen by anybody. A 'friend' can easily re-post something that you have written, or systems to provide privacy can break down or otherwise be breached. If the employer becomes aware of it, then they can act. It's not always fair, but is a fact of life today that one should always consider whether anything written on a page, blog, forum etc could be seen as detrimental to an employer, colleague or organisation, or call into question one's personal integrity.

 

Having said that - I think your employer grossly over reacted!

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

  • 9 months later...

just a little update on this, tribunal has been set for a 3 day hearing against CAB my previous employer. It turned out to be a ruse to stop me becoming employment rep, they dug around and "discovered" a news article they didnt like. It is also a breach of your political expression if the comment is political in anyway and it happens after June this year. We have a good strong case, so if anyone does have this happen dont give up and fight them if you can..

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...