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    • Sec127 (3) repealed, now gone. S. 127(3)-(5) repealed (6.4.2007) by Consumer Credit Act 2006 (c. 14), ss.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 
      • 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

ex employer wage overpayment claim


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2311 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

Hello ,

I have found this to be a great site giving invaluable help and advice and would like to ask if anyone can advise on my problem.

 

I will keep it as brief as I can.

 

I was employed for 6 years with a retailer who recently changed ownership. I was on a salary contract.

I left last December to become a full time carer.

 

In the summer of 2016 I had family problems and informed my employer I would be resigning.

They were initially supportive and my manager said I could work a reduced schedule while I sorted my problems out.

This was agreed for 3 months initially.

 

I told my manager I would need to inform housing benefits etc if I reduced my hours.

He told me I would be paid the same and not lose any money so I didn't change anything with my benefits.

My employer continued to pay me my full salary.

This arrangement went on for 5 months in the end.

 

At the end of the 5 months I told them that I still had issues to deal with at home and again tendered my resignation.

Again they offered me a different choice,

stay on but at an hourly rate which I did for the next 2 months before finally resigning for good to become a full time carer.

 

The problem is that the company now say they overpaid me for those initial 5 months and the manager is saying he never said I would be entitled to full pay.

They have been getting Ascent legal to send me letters wanting nerly £4000 in overpayments back and have just send me a letter of claim threatening legal action.

 

No official changes were made to my contract - I was salary paid so received a regular amount each month.

 

If I wasn't led to believe I was entitled to full salary I would have claimed the benefits to make up the difference. I cant backdate them now

 

I have told them this and queried why they paid me full salary for 5 months - they say they made a mistake and didn't notice.

 

I did initially say if there was an overpayment I would pay it back at an affordable rate

( my I&e calculation only left me £10ish a month to offer in the event there was an overpayment.

 

Sorry to ramble

but if anyone has any advice I will be very grateful.

 

I haven't benefited at all from this situation as I would have actually been better of either resigning as I intended or changing my contract officially to 15 hours and claiming benefits.

 

Thank you if you can advise

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you very much for your reply.

 

I think this may be my best option.

 

I am thinking that they may just be trying one last time to scare me into making a payment as its been a year now since they first contacted me and I know Ascent are working on a no win no fee basis.

 

I Will cooperate and return the letter of claim stating I don't owe the money and see what happens I guess.

 

My only concern is that I filled in a flexible working request when I first intended to resign.

 

This didn't mention any salary reduction and all agreements were between myself and my manager.

 

I don't have anything to prove what we agreed.

 

I can only use the fact that I didn't change my benefits on the understanding I wouldn't be losing my regular salary and that I intended to leave but was persuaded to stay because of my managers offer.

 

Thanks again

Link to post
Share on other sites

you can ignore the silly DCA for a start

  • Confused 1

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignore them. Theyre still a DCA. They cant do anything. Only the OC can. You need to write and dispute the alleged amount owed with the old employer, so you can put it into dispute. All the DCA's are as clueless as the others and are essentially muppets for hire. So are their pet solicitors.

 

Remember, the solicitors just do whatever they are asked to do, and get paid for it. Once they file any kind of claim, if that even happens, they run off as they have got their money.

 

its not like a criminal solicitor who asks the background. All the DCA is told is that " so and so owes me money. Go get it for me and we'll split whatever you can get".

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't ignore the DCA!!!

 

Write to them telling them that the debt is disputed.

 

Also tell them that under the Financial Conduct Authority’s Consumer Credit Sourcebook (7.5.3), they are under an obligation cease all collection activities if the debt is disputed.

 

Under the same guidelines (7.14.6), they are to inform the owner of the debt immediately that it is disputed.

 

They most likely will keep writing you but keep repeating the same guidelines

 

Never give them your personal details.

 

Never ever ignore them!

Link to post
Share on other sites

why shouldnt they ignore the DCA? the dca has no legal rights apart from asking you to pay. Deal with the employer direct.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't ignore the DCA!!!

 

Write to them telling them that the debt is disputed.

 

Also tell them that under the Financial Conduct Authority’s Consumer Credit Sourcebook (7.5.3), they are under an obligation cease all collection activities if the debt is disputed.

 

Under the same guidelines (7.14.6), they are to inform the owner of the debt immediately that it is disputed.

 

They most likely will keep writing you but keep repeating the same guidelines

 

Never give them your personal details.

 

Never ever ignore them!

 

?????? :noidea::noidea:

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

he has a history of giving very strange advice

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Also tell them that under the Financial Conduct Authority’s Consumer Credit Sourcebook (7.5.3), they are under an obligation cease all collection activities if the debt is disputed.

 

 

Sorry but this advice is basically wrong. It is much more complicated than this user has told you. Also the rule is routinely ignored

Link to post
Share on other sites

your managr told you that there would be no change so there was an expectation to be paid this money.

The employer can of course override the manager and claim they made a mistake and ask for the money back.

 

That is the limit of their powers though,

as already mentioned they are estopped from CLAIMING it back because there was an expectation on your part on no bad faith.

 

In short,

you thought you were being paid the correct amount and have spent it on that expectation rather than as a windfall.

( for example the employer accidentally paid you £10k one month instead of £1k and you went on a spending spree knowing or thinking that it was wrong).

They would be very foolish to try and recover the money using the civil claims process.

 

i would ignore the dca,

they have no powers or rights in this matter,

they are like estate agents,

they just do what they are told to do and cant make decisions for themselves.

 

If the ex-employer writes again let them know that you were told you would be paid and therefore had an expectaion to receive the money and its is a matter of estoppel and you therefore dispute any claim to recover on those two grounds

Link to post
Share on other sites

The employer will argue that a mistake was made and that there was no entitlement to the money. You would counter that the employer agreed to pay full salary in recognition of your status as a valued employee experiencing a temporary family problem

 

No paperwork to support or refute that assertion - stalemete. A court could never come down on one side over another

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

Proving estoppel is a tough test.

 

It can’t be satisfied by mere assertions

 

You have to provide evidence, especially evidence that your manager agreed to paying you same amount on reduced hours.

 

If your ex-employer has “sold” the debt to the DCA that means they (the DCA) legally owns the debt.

 

They can and will come after you. It would be legal

 

Like my previous advice; don’t ignore them!

 

Sending several emails is less stressful than going to Court.

 

Judges are usually cross at people who have behaved unreasonably.

 

Ignoring the DCA would be seen as unreasonable conduct.

 

Communication always saves a lot of headaches.

 

Don't just give them your personal details

Link to post
Share on other sites

they havent sold it to the dca otherwise they would have had to notify this to the debtor as per the Property Act 1925. The word AGENCY rather gives it away, they are an uninterested third party. Debt buyers pay about 6p in the pound for debts so your employer is unlikely to go down that route so early on.

Therefore you can ignore the dca.

estoppel requires what is known as "a clean pair of hands" and that test is not as hard as dondada suggests, it is "reasonable expectation"

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...