Jump to content

Apoplectic

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    28
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

12 Good

1 Follower

About Apoplectic

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. Thank you for that information. If it is not illegal, then it ought to be!! In my book it is a corrupt practice.
  2. Update My elderly relative (who is in a care home) received 4 letters yesterday from Chester. The contents make it clear to me that previous correspondence had not been read. Two of the letters were from the McGrath 'person' (does he exist? see another thread). I contacted Cheshire police a couple of weeks ago about possible harassment by this 'person' and will now be in touch with them again, but at a higher level.
  3. The HSE does not seem to be able to see beyond its use in an industrial accident scenario, but to me the wording is unambiguous. It seems to me it could also be used in relation to bullying at work, and teachers/head teachers doing nothing about bullying in their schools. ALL employees (and self-employed). No exceptions (unless Crown immunity). Very, very powerful. But needs test cases.
  4. I've had a reply from the HSE which I haven't got time at the mo to absorb. In the meantime get your minds around this . . . We've drifted off my elderly rel probs with the clowns of Cheshire. It seems his problems are over now, however. He has just received a letter from them offering to lend him more money!!!!!!
  5. I have received a reply from the HSE which at first glance ducks the issue, but haven't got the time to go through it in detail. I'll post an update asap.
  6. I have now made contact with the Health and Safety Executive seeking to clarify a number of points about the application of these two sections, but if I was employed in putting my name to letters demanding money, or pestering phone calls, I think I would be quite concerned.
  7. I have now contacted the Health and Safety Executive via its website and asked a number of questions about S7 H&SAW 1974 and expect a reply within 10 days. Watch this space.
  8. Fred - I also have drunk a few pints at Charing X, waiting for Loop Line train. BRW - If I mention Rolling Stone you'll know where I went to school with Mick. Now I live where the peasants are grossly obese due to centuries of in-breeding and there's more Polish than English spoken in Tescos. The Early Pilgrim Fathers came this way but wisely moved on quickly after a short spell in clink. And King John did NOT lose any treasure (a myth) but might have got a bit wet. That's your starter for 10.
  9. Two of my grandfathers rolled up a trouser leg on a regular basis and both achieved modest rank in the publicly acknowledged part of the brotherhood (ie that part which is reasonably honest and relatively harmless.) One of them seriously fell out with them but lived to a good age, the other achieved a position of some power in Greenwich, where he was able to give out work when there wasn't much of it around. But every six weeks or so he went on a bender and gran had go and retrieve him from under a train seat in Dartford Carriage sidings. Ah, they don't make 'em like that anymore!
  10. A further quick thought. If you answer the next call, ask: What is your full name? Who is your employer? So you are an employee (self-employed) then? And you are actually at work now? And calling from the UK? So you'll know your duties (as an employee) towards me when I tell you that your call(s) are making me feel ill. You are aware of the duties placed on you towards me by Section 7 of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 aren't you? You do of course realise that what you are doing now lays you open to what could possibly be an unlimited fine and may put your job and home at
  11. Hi BRW IMHO we must assume that certain parties, although giving every impression of arrogance, stupidity, and gross inefficiency, may possibly have thought of monitoring this site and although our identities may be disguised we cannot know whether or not certain parties have friends in high places who may have the ability to get into websites etc etc. (The gross lack of effective action by ‘regulatory authorities’ regarding activities well outside codes of practice, if nor the law, would indicate that they DO have FIHP. NB I have NOT used the word CORRUPTION.) It therefore may be best
  12. I've just had a long and interesting chat with an officer from Cheshire Police relating to harassment and a specific employee of a certain finance company based in the county. Not a lot of joy but a record of my info will be on their file and I have a ref. no. for it. It is my belief that should this and similar companies eventually find themselves having to answer in a criminal court for some of the very dubious practices revealed on this site and others it may be important that law enforcement agencies have as much info in their systems against that day. Cheshire Police have a very goo
  13. I would be very interested to know from bank and other finance industry employees if they are personally aware, or have been made aware by their employers, of Sections 7 and 37 of the Health and Safety at Work Etc Act 1974. Sect 7 - It shall be the duty of every employee while at work (a) to take reasonable care for the health and safety of himself and of other persons who may be affected by his acts or omissions at work . . . Sect 37 - Where an offence under any of the relevant statutory provisions committed by a body corporate is proved to have been committed with the consent
  14. No, no, there is no threat. One is merely trying to be helpful by supplying a reminder about information that is in the public domain which every employed individual is required to know and act on, with additional material that may be of interest to those working in the finance industry. Making employees aware of their obligations under S1 H&SAW 1974 is a valuable public service and may well prevent them being saddled with debt, loose their homes or gain a criminal record due to making a careless, but avoidable, mistake at work.
  15. It might be useful to add this to the suggested text in my previous post, and I would welcome comments on whether the whole thing, if used, should be presented as an attachment and headed ‘without prejudice’ “Additionally, before replying to, or actioning, [the following] [the attached] letter you will presumably take into account any personal responsibilities and obligations you may have in relation to the Prevention from Harassment Act 1997, and the Administration of Justice Act 1970, especially in regard to Section 40.”
×
×
  • Create New...