Have had something very similar happen to me before. I actually got the company that I was undertaking the work for (due to it being a business critical project and me stating to them that I was going to have to look elsewhere due to not getting paid) to put some pressure on the employment agency who then put pressure on the umbrella company, and within a day or 2 of that happening I was paid in full (dont know where they found the money as like you they claimed they didnt have enough). Personally, I'd attempt that option first, and if that doesnt work out, as per what BankFodder said get that county court claim raised against the umbrella company.

Not saying that perplexity is wrong here, as they may very well be right, but as per section 2.18 of those same guidelines 'Sales by private individuals not acting for business purposes are not covered by the DSRs'. I realise that in the guidelines this is listed under the heading question of 'Auctions and the DSRs', however, as my neighbour recently found out she was left with no recourse when she decided that she no longer really needed an item that she purchased via Buy It Now on eBay from a private seller (the item hadn't as yet arrived to her house). Apparently she spoke to someone from consumer direct and was advised that as it was a private seller and not a business that the regulations didnt apply and was pointed to the above mentioned section. Whether that advice was correct or not I've got no idea, but it may very well be worth speaking to consumer direct about it.

I would simply put to your director(s) that if this is something that you have signed previously, there should be no need for you to sign it again

You're in a bit of a catch 22 here, as you do have a right to take your accrued holidays during your notice period, but in order to take those holidays, you have to have it approved by your employer.

As Scarlet said, they are nothing to be too worried about. When I had mine (many years ago now) they asked me quite a few questions pertaining to family, relationships, etc. They also interviewed a number of family and friends, both ones I mentioned on the forms and ones that I didnt. Just be honest with any questions they ask and you'll be fine

The information that Bigred has offered you there is spot on. Another thing that you would probably be asked to prove if you did attempt to take this to the Tribunal is if you've exhausted any other avenues. I realise you've already lodged a formal grievance, but attempting to continue to resolve the issue is something that personally I would continue to do. Have you spoken to your direct manager's manager or your HR team to discuss the issue to see if you can come an agreement whether that be some form of alternative arrangement or compromise? If this fails, another option is possible mediation through ACAS if you can get your employer to agree to it. From my perspective, if you honestly love the job you are doing and feel that you've exhausted all your options and there is no other possible alternative for you but to resign then get in contact with someone to see if you have a strong case for constructive dismissal. You've also stated that it is a very generous redundancy payment that you are being offered, so you've really got to weigh up your options. Anyway, I wish you the best with which ever path you choose to go down .

I dont know if this has been looked at (sorry just skimmed through the posts), but what does the Company Car Policy actually say in regards to both standard and non standard cars? Are you made aware in the policy of where to find the information of what is standard and non-standard and the associated costs behind which you choose? If so, just because the car is not new does not mean that the new starter should be exempt from these costs Is there any other wording in the policy about trying to minimise costs to the employee by attempting to reassign the vehicle where possible? If so, this could very well work to your advantage. Also, another thing to check for is if they have something in there in regards to a comparable alternative if the chosen car is not available. If the new starter did choose a standard car that wasnt available (possibly due to having to wait x amount of months) and they have given him your old car as an alternative simply as it was readily available (just trying to think of possible excuses that they may use) the upgraded car is not comparable alternative, and therefore either the company or the new starter should be liable for the costs. To me it just seems as though they are trying to make a sweeter deal for the new starter at your expense, however, unless the company car policy has been re written since you left the company what is in there should apply to all of their employees, hence the reason to check the wording carefully to see if there is anything in there that may help you with your upcoming defence. Anyway, I wish you the best of luck with it, and keep us all updated with how things go!!

I think that the problem here is that HMRC do support the use of electronic payslips. As per their website in regards to the issuing of P60's "Even if you have been giving your employees electronic payslips, you must give your employees a paper form P60 at the end of the tax year. You must not, by law, give them P60 details electronically for them to print off." (See Guide to filing PAYE forms online and paying electronically, paragraph 6.15, at www.hmrc.gov.uk/helpsheets/mp2.pdf) The problem as I see it however, is not just if an email is seen as a written form of payslip, but as the others have stated it has to be given to an employee. If the employee doesn't know or cant access it due to it being sent in an email, then they could argue that it hasnt been given to them. Also, if their only method of accessing these payslips is through a work computer, what happens when they are either off sick or on holidays, etc?

With contracts that contain restraint clauses such as the one that you signed, common law frowns upon them if they prevent a person from earning his/her living. However, if the circumstances justify the restraint, the courts will uphold it. There are a number of factors that a judge will consider if it comes down to legal proceedings, which are things such as a. the length of time of the clause - a restriction for 3 months such in your contract is more likely to be upheld by the courts than say something like 12 months. b. the type of business covered - in your example, a lot of recruitment companies these days actually have specialised recruiters for certain business sectors. If you were recruiting in sector "A" for your old firm, but are now recruiting for sector "B" in your new firm, this in theory would not threaten the business of your ex employer. c. distance / area - if you are working in a major city, a distance of 10 miles would severely hamper your future job prospects and therefore the clause may be struck out in court.

From my experience, unless there is something in your contract stating that you will get some form of enhanced pay rate for working on the bank holidays and christmas day, unfortunately there isn't really much you can do about it, as it really is up to the employer to decide if they pay you above your basic rate for working those days.

I'm definitely no expert in this field, but two key things that you mentioned in your last post was that the contract that you currently have does state your current grade and the amount of hours you work a week. In my opinion, that really is something that they shouldnt be able to change unless you've agreed to it.

When parking in a private car park, the contract is between the person driving the car and the private company, which means that only the driver can be subject to the ticket. Correct me if I'm wrong here, but as far as I can see, if they don't know who the driver was, they really cant claim the penalty. Even though you own the car I dont believe that you are under any obligation to tell them who was driving the car either.

The only way that you should have to pay child maintenance at all is if you ex (assuming she has the main custody of the children) applies for child maintenance. Once that occurs the CSA usually gathers details from both parties to determine what the pay rate if any will be. You can call up CSA and talk to your case worker about your situation, etc to find out any information such as where this money you owe came from, how the rate you pay was worked out, etc as they should have a full history of all payments. As far as the CSA sending bailiffs, they wont usually go that far, so dont worry (also your parents gear would be safe). What they do have the right to do is contact your employer though and deduct money from your pay before you get it. In all honesty though, if you and your ex are on amicable terms, it is far better working out some form of legal agreement between you rather than going through the CSA, so much less painful. Good luck with it and hopefully you will be able to sort things out.

In Australia, you can only return goods if either a) they are defective b) they aren't as described or c) if you let the salesperson know why you wanted the goods and the goods are not fit for the purpose you told the salesperson you wanted them for. Other than that, you are fairly much out of luck. Most stores, etc are fairly lenient when it comes to returns, in that if it is an item of clothing and they can see it hasnt been worn they will at the very least allow a return for exchange, your best bet is just to send an email off to them explaining the situation and see what they say. Good Luck !!

Thanks for that, greatly appreciated . Just wanted to clarify when abouts I could give my notice (just means i have to wait another 20 odd days before i can give my notice).