Jump to content

Kefz

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    22
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

1 Follower

About Kefz

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. You're right and it hasn't done for some time
  2. Indeedy it's ridiculous the way they act. I'm not surprised that lesser willed people cave in You think I'm on safe ground too?
  3. Hi all, Have a bit of an unusual (or maybe not so) situation with Robinson Way and a credit card company who have sold their debt to RW. Back in 2005 the credit agreement came to an add and a default was registered. I paid off what I believed to be owed in 3 instalments, and didn't hear anything again. Around 2008/2009 time, I started getting letters from Robinson Way of the usual sentiment of 'you must pay'. I denied the debt, and asked for a signed copy of the CCA. They provided a photocopy of an application form dated years previous which I was quick to point out didn't have
  4. Just an update - the company I work for have agreed (in writing) to payout both bonus milestones without the need for a solicitors letter! I hope this thread hopes anyone else having a similar issue. K
  5. Hi Rooster Again I think that's fair point and just about done and dusted if it's either in your terms of employment or in the bonus agreement/documentation - but if it's not agreed then the point of the matter is that there's a question/expectation there that hasn't been met. In your case it'd be like saying 'oh well actually on top of the existing stipulations for collecting it, you also must be an employee for 28 days after the date of payout'. Agreeing basic principles at the start is one thing, adding a second set of principles when it suits is another really ... Cheers
  6. At risk of sounding provocative, but I have absolutely no doubt that a) it's prudent that you should leave after payout to avoid the mere risk of this and also b) a lot of companies will try it on if you do leave and they can try and dodge it But that doesn't mean to say that you should roll over and take it in that event. Storage, in that case you'd be at a disadvantage since obviously the terms of your bonus would be clear that it's up to them if you leave .. unless obviously there are circumstances where that might not apply, ect ect ect. K
  7. Been asked to go in for a meeting, probably this week to 'discuss my issues'. Not sure if this is grievance related but will be making notes and following up with an email to confirm no matter what happens! K
  8. I've spoken to a solicitor c/o our Halifax insurance and the results are very promising. Apparently the route I've taken is exactly correct, namely: 1) Raising the issue in a meeting 2) Raising a grievance as a result of the lack of satisfaction in the above, arguing that the company bonus isn't discretionary based on paperwork attached to the bonus, and the lack of custom and practice, plus the warning of anticipated breach of contract/unlawful withholding of earnings (bonuses considered to be contractual become wages under the Employment Rights Act 1996 (section 27)). 3) Awaiting fe
  9. No what I meant was that the paperwork has absolutely no reference to what happens if you're not around for any part of the examination period. K
  10. Yep I've been over that before. There's absolutely nothing relating to who is entitled to the bonus at all believe it or not, it really is that basic.
  11. Hi Trilby Many thanks for your help. I've not drafted it yet but just had a meeting where I was told that I will not receive the bonus payouts if I am not an active employee on the payout dates. As I argued, this is not included or even insinuated in the bonus paperwork and they are actually denying that the paperwork effectively becomes a contractual obligation to myself! I'm raising this as a formal grievance but the rationale seems to be to keep me here until the end of Feb. Any ideas? K
  12. Hi Ker I do indeed - to be honest, it went tango uniform unfortunately. Despite hearing that the judgement was not legitimate due to it being a judgement by default whilst under the CCA (not allowable) and with clear evidence including a letter from the solicitors firm of them actually admitting to coming to an agreement then effectively changing tack a month later, a letter was sent after the hearing stating under the Act which dictates set asides, I hadn't "shown enough evidence". Just to make it more interesting, the judge slapped me for the costs of the other half at the required
  13. Hey guys Bit of an interesting one. The place I work tries to act like the new Google, and as such has a bit of an ill-considered bonus scheme. Details of it were released about 5-6 months ago on a single side of A4 that was given out after several meetings (one private, one to the company workforce as a group). There has never been a bonus scheme previously, and never any communique further aside from monthly "we're doing this well" updates given verbally. On the A4 sheet there are details of what the bonus amounts to (basically it's staggered sales targets in the calendar year of 2
  14. Interesting, thanks for the info - do you HAVE to attend the court? The solicitors have already backed out of attending in person.
×
×
  • Create New...