Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 31/05/12 in all areas

  1. it's almost certain that the SA telecom company that is billing Vodafone UK haven't actually passed any of this 'charges' onto any third party yet (they do have billing periods). By the way it's this SA telco that Vodafone UK wants to send the questionable monies to http://www.vodacom.co.za/personal/main/home/ you are being mugged (but South Africa?)
    1 point
  2. Hi, Wow, the oc have offered me the 11k!! I've accepted it! They've also confirmed that it will be paid in full to me!! No arguments just apologies! Donation coming to CAG as soon as the money hits my banks account!! So to everybody else who is thinking about claiming give it a go!
    1 point
  3. Thanks Regan. Judging by how things are going, I would say that you are right in assuming that, should the council offer compensation, it would definitely come with a 'shut up' clause. My family and I are not very materialistic people. I do not want to have money thrust upon me and be told to go away. The only way I can see this working would be if I could continue to pursue criminal and civil charges against the Bailiffs, I got an apology from the council and assurances that they had taken steps to ensure this never happens to anyone again, and that, all involved would be put on a discipl
    1 point
  4. http://www.bbctvlicence.com/Detector%20vans.htm A letter to the BBC under the Freedom of Information Act asked how many vans there were, and how many were in operation on a given day, but the BBC declined to provide an answer. Divulging the number of vans does not, in itself, prevent their effectiveness, any more than knowing the number of police cars undermines the police. Public knowledge that there is a large number of detector vans might be expected to increase prevention rather than reduce it. Therefore, the BBC's refusal to answer implies that the number of detector vans is sma
    1 point
  5. I see the problem. Maybe a couple of the people who've helped on the thread would express their opinions? HB
    0 points
  6. You may like to read the case of Coleman v Attridge law. The law of Associated Discrimination is quite complex and you may need to take legal advice, but at least this is a start. You have stated a cople of things that your Mum may try and 'develop' with personnel / HR. Her own health issues plus the caring needs for you father may butt in to what the Hospital has said about Flexible Working. They should have a policy on this. They should also have a Policy on caring for relatives....... be careful here because many hospitals DELIBERATELY leave out a whole section of relative ie adult
    0 points
  7. Hi Also have a look at this link from ACAS of Flexible Working: http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=3492 and also this PDF from ACAS:
    0 points
  8. I am not sure what will be achieved by adding 'neglect' ??? !!! Perhaps that is the wrong wording.... is there a sickness Policy that management is supposed to follow? They say these are written for the 'support' of the worker, but actually it is to put pressure on you. However if the manager did not follow a policy of checking up on you or ensuring that someone did so then perhaps that is a grievance.
    0 points
  9. This should make for good reading Tedney :- http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?348946-Barclaycard-Failure-to-comply-with-SAR-***Costs-received-and-claim-withdrawn***/page2&highlight=sick+of+thames+credit Regards Andy
    0 points
  10. What are you talking about? I willingly borrowed. Nobody persuaded me to take a credit card. I asked for it and used it at my desire. Not the banks fault at all. My illness is the reason for my financial situation, nothing else. Without my illness I would still be working and happily paying MY debts.
    0 points
×
×
  • Create New...