Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the 02/01/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the 19/05/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, 02/06/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
    • Monika the first four pages of the Private parking section have at least 12 of our members who have also been caught out on this scam site. That's around one quarter of all our current complaints. Usually we might expect two current complaints for the same park within 4 pages.  So you are in good company and have done well in appealing to McDonalds in an effort to resolve the matter without having  paid such a bunch of rogues. Most people blindly pay up. Met . Starbucks and McDonalds  are well aware of the situation and seem unwilling to make it easier for motorists to avoid getting caught. For instance, instead of photographing you, if they were honest and wanted you  to continue using their services again, they would have said "Excuse me but if you are going to go to Mc donalds from here, it will cost you £100." But no they kett quiet and are now pursuing you for probably a lot more than £100 now. They also know thst  they cannot charge anything over the amount stated on the car park signs. Their claims for £160 or £170 are unlawful yet so many pay that to avoid going to Court. When the truth is that Met are unlikely to take them to Court since they know they will lose. The PCNs are issued on airport land which is covered by Byelaws so only the driver can be pursued, not the keeper. But they keep writing to you as they do not know who was driving unless you gave it away when you appealed. Even if they know you were driving they should still lose in Court for several reasons. The reason we ask you to fill out our questionnaire is to help you if MET do decide to take you to Court in the end. Each member who visited the park may well have different experiences while there which can help when filling out a Witness statement [we will help you with that if it comes to it.] if you have thrown away the original PCN  and other paperwork you obviously haven't got a jerbil or a guinea pig as their paper makes great litter boxes for them.🙂 You can send an SAR to them to get all the information Met have on you to date. Though if you have been to several sites already, you may have done that by now. In the meantime, you will be being bombarded by illiterate debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors all threatening you with ever increasing amounts as well as being hung drawn and quartered. Their letters can all be safely ignored. On the odd chance that you may get a Letter of Claim from them just come back to us and we will get you to send a snotty letter back to them so that they know you are not happy, don't care a fig for their threats and will see them off in Court if they finally have the guts to carry on. If you do have the original PCN could you please post it up, carefully removing your name. address and car registration number but including dates and times. If not just click on the SAR to take you to the form to send to Met.
    • In order for us to help you we require the following information:- [if there are more than one defendant listed - tell us] 1 defendant   Which Court have you received the claim from ? County Court Business Centre, Northampton   Name of the Claimant ? LC Asset 2 S.A R.L   Date of issue – . 28/04/23   Particulars of Claim   What is the claim for –    (1) The Claimant ('C') claims the whole of the outstanding balance due and payable under an agreement referenced xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and opened effective from xx/xx/2017. The agreement is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 ('CCA'), was signed by the Defendant ('D') and from which credit was extended to D.   (2) D failed to comply with a Default Notice served pursuant to s87 (1) CCA and by xx/xx/2022 a default was recorded.   (3) As at xx/xx/2022 the Defendant owed MBNA LTD the sum of 12,xxx.xx. By an agreement in writing the benefit of the debt has been legally assigned to C effective xx/xx/2022 and made regular upon C serving a Notice of Assignment upon D shortly thereafter.   (4) And C claims- 1. 12,xxx.xx 2. Interest pursuant to Section 69 County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from xx/01/2023 to xx/04/2023 of 2xx.xx and thereafter at a daily rate of 2.52 to date of judgement or sooner payment. Date xx/xx/2023   What is the total value of the claim? 12k   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? Yes   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? N/A Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After   Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online   Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes, but amount differs slightly   Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. DP issued claim   Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Not that I recall...   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Not that I recall...   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Yes   Why did you cease payments? Loss of employment main cause   What was the date of your last payment? Early 2021   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No   -----------------------------------
    • Hello CAG Team, I'm adding the contents of the claim to this thread, but wanted to open the thread with an urgent question: Do I have to supply a WS for a claim with a court date that states " at the hearing the court will consider allocation and, time permitting, give an early neutral evaluation of the case" ? letter is an N24 General Form of Judgement or Order, if so, then I've messed up again. Court date 25 May 2024 The letter from court does not state (like the other claims I have) that I must provide WS within 28 days.. BUT I have recently received a WS from Link for it! making me think I do need to!??
  • 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

Dismissed after unfair disciplinary and discrimination grievance


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2202 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

I'm really not sure why you're having such a difficult time understanding what I said when I've now written it twice.

 

We were talking about a particular night out him and his girlfriend had, he said how she felt very conscious in what she was wearing because she is barrel shapped and I was saying she had no need to feel conscious and she looked really pretty in the photos on facebook. He said she got really drunk that night and was shaking his head. I said was she frisky and hard to manage when she was drunk (meaning was she a live wire - I was quite animated when I said it) it in no way alluded to anything sexual.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you think your employers (or an ET!) aren’t going to dig just as deep as the enquiries you’ll face here?!

 

My employer didn't dig deep at all, they didn't even speak to me about it which is what I've posted on here about.

 

I'm beginning to wonder how valuable your advice is when you're unable to read and understand my post.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm really not sure why you're having such a difficult time understanding what I said when I've now written it twice.

 

We were talking about a particular night out him and his girlfriend had, he said how she felt very conscious in what she was wearing because she is barrel shapped and I was saying she had no need to feel conscious and she looked really pretty in the photos on facebook. He said she got really drunk that night and was shaking his head. I said was she frisky and hard to manage when she was drunk (meaning was she a live wire - I was quite animated when I said it) it in no way alluded to anything sexual.

 

I’m not having a difficult time.

Your comment was easily interpreted as sexual, leading to the difficult time you’ve had by being given a warning. The process wasn’t “by the book”, but that is irrelevant given the outcome would have been the same even if the process had been followed perfectly!

 

Yet you still can’t see that your behaviour was inappropriate. Inappropriate, even if not taken sexual, and it’s easy to see how it can have been perceived as a sexually based comment.

 

If you can’t see that then your perception is skewed.

They’ll easily demonstrate that at an ET. They’ll then use that to demonstrate how you could think you were a great fit in the team and a team player, when they’ll say you weren’t.

Do you have any documented feedback / appraisals when they said how great you were? Or any documentary evidence?

If not I can see what they'll say (rightly, or wrongly!) at an ET.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

My employer didn't dig deep at all, they didn't even speak to me about it which is what I've posted on here about.

 

I'm beginning to wonder how valuable your advice is when you're unable to read and understand my post.

 

Ahem. There is a difference between “unable to read and understand” and “able to read and understand, but reaches a conclusion you don’t like”.

Bottom line : talking about a colleague’s partner / girlfriend / boyfriend as “frisky” is just plain inappropriate, even if it couldn’t have been taken as a sexually-based comment. It easily could be taken as sexually based though. If you are still resistant to accepting this, what was the point of asking for opinions??

 

I’ve explained how they’ll easily demolish your assertions that:

a) the warning was incorrect or discriminatory (even if the process was flawed, a perfect process would reach the same conclusion even with “your side” that you’ve presented here)

b) your dismissal was unlawful from being based on a protected characteristic. Unless you have documentary evidence of them saying what a great team player you were, they’ll use your lack of insight to say you again had no insight and thought you were a great team player and a good fit with the team.

 

You don’t like my interpretation? Fine, let’s see what interpretation one of the experts like Becky or Emmzzi have, if they see this thread and feel they can contribute. That might give further points to how this will likely pan out.

 

Unless you have documentary evidence you’ll have to take your chances at an ET....... in the end it is their interpretation (rather than yours or mine) that’ll count.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But if I had said something that was inappropriate, I would have apologised. I would never intend to offend anyone, especially with a sexual comment as that would have been very inappropriate. But it was never said or meant in a sexual context.

 

However, the person in question, and other colleagues have made many a sexual comment to me (and to the colleague that complained about me) so even if I had meant it in a sexual way, my comment is no different to others. So to me, it feels like a double standard, coupled with the fact it was never a sexual conversation in teh first place and was turned into a really sexually lewd conversation when quoted in the warning.

 

Yes I have it all documented that they were happy with my work etc. When I received the warning, I emailed a written grievance that my colleague raised a complaint to me when I don't believe he would have raised the same complaint against a male colleague. And the fact there was no investigation and his word was taken and mine not even sought, was also unfair. And to determine that the action would have been the same.. would it? Is a written warning really what would have happened had the matter been dealt with properly? Why did I receive a warning when the same action hasn't been taken against anyone else?

 

My grievance wasn't dealt with and I was then dismissed. That doesn't seem fair to me at all. I know I can't take an objective view as I'm embroiled in this. But I feel that I was dismissed because of my complaint and not the performance. As my performance had only ever been praised before. Even in the email when I received my written warning, it stated that I was a valued member of the team and they were keen to continue working with me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But if I had said something that was inappropriate, I would have apologised. I would never intend to offend anyone, especially with a sexual comment as that would have been very inappropriate. But it was never said or meant in a sexual context.

 

Hang on, then.

Is it your position that it just wasn’t inappropriate to describe a colleague’s girlfriend as frisky, and that it couldn’t have been taken as being in a sexual context?.

 

Did you ever complain about comments made by others you felt were sexual and inappropriate, that you are now using to excuse your behaviour?

 

 

Even in the email when I received my written warning, it stated that I was a valued member of the team and they were keen to continue working with me.

You can be of value to a team even if you still aren’t a “good fit” within a team, and they can say they were trying to maintain a team dynamic / trust & confidence”, but events after demonstrated that this still wasn’t sufficient.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hang on, then.

Is it your position that it just wasn’t inappropriate to describe a colleague’s girlfriend as frisky, and that it couldn’t have been taken as being in a sexual context?.

 

Did you ever complain about comments made by others you felt were sexual and inappropriate, that you are now using to excuse your behaviour?

 

 

 

You can be of value to a team even if you still aren’t a “good fit” within a team, and they can say they were trying to maintain a team dynamic / trust & confidence”, but events after demonstrated that this still wasn’t sufficient.

 

If it wasn't appropriate or taken the wrong way, then obviously I'm sorry for that as it was never my intention for it to be taken in that way. It was clearly a misunderstanding.

 

And yes I did complain about the comments made - but I spoke directly to the guys in question as I felt it was a better way to deal with matters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And keeping in mind, I had no idea that the guy was offended by me in any way until I received a formal written warning about it. When I was abroad travelling with him I might add! So it made for a bit of an awkward encounter in the hotel lobby.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hang on, then.

Is it your position that it just wasn’t inappropriate to describe a colleague’s girlfriend as frisky, and that it couldn’t have been taken as being in a sexual context?.

 

Gets the reply

 

If it wasn't appropriate or taken the wrong way, then obviously I'm sorry for that as it was never my intention for it to be taken in that way. It was clearly a misunderstanding.

 

 

So, from the “if”, you still seem to be ‘fence sitting’ and feeling that because you didn’t intend it to be inappropriate, you somehow think it wasn’t. Good luck with the ET if you give them that impression.

How about rephrasing the question “With hindsight, can you see how the statement about his girlfriend being frisky can be seen to be inappropriate”?

 

And yes I did complain about the comments made - but I spoke directly to the guys in question as I felt it was a better way to deal with matters.

So, your gambit is that the complaints were treated differently due to your gender, and not that your complaints weren’t made to the company, but instead to the individuals, and his complaint was to the company.

Were the company aware at all of your complaints to the individuals?

If so, did you ask for the company to deal with them as complaint(s) as well as you raising it directly with the individual(s)

If not, how can you expect the company to deal with them equally to the complaint made (to the company) against you?

 

“I never made a complaint to the company for them to take action against an individual, but it is unfair that I’ve been treated differently as a result of a complaint made against me” seems to be what you are advocating, but all the company needs to do is say “different complaint procedures invoked for different classes of complaint, hence different outcome not discriminatory”

 

Tl:dr is “I didn’t ask them to investigate a formal complaint against the others, and now I’m surprised the result of a formal complaint (against me) gave a different outcome! It must be discrimination”. You are grasping at straws. The different outcome is from the different processes, not different genders.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And keeping in mind, I had no idea that the guy was offended by me in any way until I received a formal written warning about it. When I was abroad travelling with him I might add! So it made for a bit of an awkward encounter in the hotel lobby.

 

If I was offended by someone badly enough to make a formal complaint against them, I too would avoid them socially as far as possible, and interact with them only where my employment required it, for the minimum required to discharge my professional obligation.

Trying to discuss it with them might just make a bad situation worse.

They might even have been told not to discuss the issue with you, and given the option to only interact with you when necessary for matters relating to both of your employment.

 

Awkward? Certainly would be, but that’d be the fault of the person who made the inappropriate comment........

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gets the reply

 

 

 

So, from the “if”, you still seem to be ‘fence sitting’ and feeling that because you didn’t intend it to be inappropriate, you somehow think it wasn’t. Good luck with the ET if you give them that impression.

How about rephrasing the question “With hindsight, can you see how the statement about his girlfriend being frisky can be seen to be inappropriate”?

 

 

So, your gambit is that the complaints were treated differently due to your gender, and not that your complaints weren’t made to the company, but instead to the individuals, and his complaint was to the company.

Were the company aware at all of your complaints to the individuals?

If so, did you ask for the company to deal with them as complaint(s) as well as you raising it directly with the individual(s)

If not, how can you expect the company to deal with them equally to the complaint made (to the company) against you?

 

“I never made a complaint to the company for them to take action against an individual, but it is unfair that I’ve been treated differently as a result of a complaint made against me” seems to be what you are advocating, but all the company needs to do is say “different complaint procedures invoked for different classes of complaint, hence different outcome not discriminatory”

 

Tl:dr is “I didn’t ask them to investigate a formal complaint against the others, and now I’m surprised the result of a formal complaint (against me) gave a different outcome! It must be discrimination”. You are grasping at straws. The different outcome is from the different processes, not different genders.

 

I see your point that I didn't raise my complaint with the company, only the individual.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see your point that I didn't raise my complaint with the company, only the individual.

 

Which means you can’t show the different outcomes arose from discrimination (rather than the fact the company couldn’t issue written warnings for complaints they weren’t aware of!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

You feel you’ve been victimised, by complaining about discrimination? that you now accept wasn’t discriminatory??

Are you saying that the company should be happy that you start making UNWARRANTED claims of discrimination?!

 

 

You also seem to only accept grudgingly, that your comment was inappropriate, and your disciplinary warning (even if the process wasn’t perfect) entirely lawful.

 

Compare and contrast:

Person A : “I’m so sorry. I accept that (even though I meant it entirely innocently) my comment could have been perceived as inappropriate. I can see why you’ve had to warn me and I’ll make sure I don’t do it again. By the way, comments have been made to me in a similar vein. I’ve (up until now) tried to deal with this by feeding back to the individual. Now I know how seriously this is taken I will also make sure the company are aware, even though we may reach a mutual decision when I note them to the company that they don’t need action . I’m likely to be more robust than some, though the company might decide to remind all staff of their obligations.

As part of how seriously I view this, and to show how likely I am to be more careful from now on I’m even happy to discuss my warning as part of a general debate on boundaries, and how they can easily be breached, even inadvertently, so everyone gets a reminder without any of the other members of the team feeling singled out. I understand the company has to be seen to take a firm line on this.

 

Person B. “I’m only grudgingly accepting the warning because I have to. Deep down I know it is discrimination, because I’m female, even though the company could never have taken the same disciplinary action against the males, because I never actually raised it with the company. I’m giving off a “i’m being discriminated against” vibe, and because it isn’t actually discrimination I give the impression that I won’t let the matter drop, and it is disrupting the team dynamic.

I’m giving off a “I’m only going to be trouble” vibe, reinforced when I claim victimisation when I’m dismissed.

 

Based on your responses here, it seems likely you have presented to them as “Person B”

You can claim victimisation all you like, but with less than 2 years service you can only bring that ET claim if it is based on a protected characteristic, such as gender.

If they have “victimised” you for being ruminative and / or surly in response to your (warranted) disciplinary, or found you griping about “discrimination” when

a) they couldn’t act equally between a formal complaint made to them and complaints they weren’t even aware of!, and

b) their actions and your responses would see anyone of any gender dismissed

 

that isn’t anything an ET would entertain. How are you going to prove the “victimisation” was based on gender if the disciplinary process wasn’t discriminatory, either?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone else noticing an astonishing similarity to versions of this story that have appeared in every single employment forum site over the past three or four weeks? Banned poster(s) on one, outed on another, and went to a private part of the forum on another. I'm sure it's just a coincidence...

Link to post
Share on other sites

basically they can boot you out for any reason, real or imagined and there is little you can do other then chase them for using the incorrect procedure. So, did they pay you for your notice period? Did they pay you your accrued annual leave entitlement? If no to these then you have a claim against them and it will be worth consulting ACAS to get the ball rolling. the lack of a written policy doesnt mean the law can be igniored

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...