Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About SparklesJD

  • Rank
    <b>Corporate Poster</b>
  1. As Emmzzi says, they've not followed any of the correct processes for dismissal, but unless you can prove (in balance of probability) it was for a reason under which the 2-year limit doesn't apply (e.g. race, sexual orientation, disability, religion), then unfortunately there's not much that can be done. Check your contract, if the disciplinary process forms part of the contract (including manuals, codes of conduct etc.) then it might be breach of contract for them to sack you without going through it. On the same note though, there's often a non-competition clause in the contract, which you may've broken by working for your friend without speaking to them first. I think that you may be able to go to ET for unlawful deduction of wages (including holiday pay, salary, etc.) before the 2 years, but I'm not 100%. I would probably try sending them a formal letter first setting out what you believe is due to you and asking it be paid by a certain date. This may help: http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/england/work_e/work_problems_at_work_e/et_employment_tribunals_from_29_july_2013_e/et_making_a_claim_is_it_worth_it/et80_claims_for_breach_of_contract.htm (Corporate poster for CU experience, merely an interested observer and former practitioner of employment law, always get proper advice).
  2. Hi SF, Based on your account, I think your husband is being treated a bit shabbily on the face of it. 1. Was Friday a formal meeting, or was that when he heard it from a colleague? 2. Has he had anything in writing yet? 3. If yes, is there any right of appeal or alternatives suggested in the meeting or letter? 4. What notice has he received that this will be happening? I.e. when does it take effect? I would suggest to anyone in a situation like this that they make notes of everything, not War and Peace, but i. time/date ii. who was there? iii. where was this? i.e. in a private setting, shopfloor, etc. iv. what was said. Be factual and succinct. If you can't remember exact words, what was the overall message? Do this following every conversation as quickly as you can before memory fades. If notes are made in a meeting, make sure you get copies and check that you agree with them. If there is a redundancy situation, it sounds possible that they're trying to avoid their responsibilities to either follow a process or make a payment. Could they be acting in good faith keeping his money as is, but taking responsibility away? Has there ever been any suggestion that he can't cope, poor performance, etc.? Why don't they want to offer him the new role? Is it earmarked for someone else? Someone else at risk? In which case they might have a case to give it to them if they're more senior or on (ordinary) maternity leave, for example. There's quite a lot going on here and I think that he would benefit from taking some advice from someone like a TU legal expert (if he's in one); the CAB or ACAS. I would imagine that an ET would take a very dim view of someone with such long service being treated like this, however, going to ET is a big and expensive step and you would need proper advice first. 'Constructive dismissal' is resignation in direct response to action by the employer that breaks the relationship of trust and confidence between you and your employer. It can be a number of little things culminating in a 'final straw' or a one-off resulting in the break-down of the relationship. It's basically saying 'you gave me no choice but to resign'. Be aware that if it's SO bad that you had to resign, the longer you leave it to do so, the harder it is to make the argument that the break was the employer's fault. (I am a corporate poster, but not in a HR role, I just have an interest / past experience. I offer my opinion in good faith, usual stuff about getting advice applies).
  3. Remember that potential credit is also a contributing factor to credit score - so if you have credit cards for emergencies, etc. they can go against you, even if you have a zero balance - obviously the theory being that you could take out a loan then run up more debt on the CC.
  4. No worries I can understand the concern, some of our Board had similar worries before we started using it, but I don't think that it will and in my experience, it hasn't so far. We can put in our own criteria and tolerances and we can always override the system. For example, a long-standing relationship with a member still counts for a lot in most CUs. What it has done is to allow us to cut the costs and become more sustainable. In turn we can offer competitive rates to more affluent members, which we need to do so that we can continue lending to our traditional customer base at affordable rates.
  5. Hi Acid53 & CitB, Yes, it's valid as far as I know (see below). We've not had anyone query this yet - which isn't to say that they're all happy with it necessarily. A bit of background which you may or may not be interested in. The DWP, for a number of reasons, which vary in believability depending on how many conspiracies you believe, have put a significant amount of money into CU infrastructure and back-office improvements to make the sector fit-for-purpose. One of these improvements has been the introduction of an Automated Lending Decision making tool (ALD). This enables us to see all those debts, aliases and defaults that members creatively hide from us The FCA are relevant here only in that once we have the information, it forms part of the 'know your customer' stuff, assuming we're following the other regs. I don't know what their view on the gross vs net borrowing reporting would be, they may feel it enables other lenders to make a more informed decision, or they may not. There are other financial institutions where you might have savings, loans, a credit card, a mortgage... it would be a big can of worms to open IMO. My CU have the ALD and the reduction in our bad debt levels, now that we can see the member's situation properly, is dramatic. We've always asked for credit info, but didn't get this degree of detail and although we explain to members that it's better to be honest, clearly not everyone feels able to be as truthful as we'd like - because, yes, sometimes we wouldn't be able to lend. We only use the ALD (info provided by and to Experian) when someone borrows, not for account opening, and we do not report savings - I believe that CitB is correct that it's not actually allowed (I think under the Consumer Credit Act from a vague memory?), it's not something that we have even considered to be honest and I agree with Cit B and think our members would be dead against it. The net borrowing position would look more favourable, particularly if as in some CUs you are asked to save as you repay, but we're asked for the loan amount that was applied for and what was approved, not net amounts and we'd probably be breaking our agreement with Experian if we started using net lending figures (aside from whatever the regs say about reporting savings). Whilst I'm not entirely sympathetic, for obvious reasons, I shall try to be fair: - Were you asked to sign an up-to-date loan agreement, which would explain that they would carry out a credit search and that information would be shared in return? - You wouldn't be charged penalties if you want to repay some of the loan with savings, which would bring down your overall debt burden for referencing purposes. - You could, although I wouldn't recommend it, ask for a note to be put on your file to say that 'the net amount is x' (others on here will be able to explain better than I, but notes on file are rumoured to linger long past the issue itself and can lead to a 'refer' which some high street lenders allegedly treat as a 'decline'). - There are other things we encourage our members to do to improve their rating, but you probably don't need me to go through those. Hope this helps, SJD I am a corporate poster, running a medium-sized credit union in the South of England. Any posts purely represent my own opinion and shouldn't be taken for financial advice or anything more than a well-intentioned pointer towards where you can look for more detailed information. I am interested and have some past experience in the area of employment law, however, please note that I have no pretensions to expertise here! It is vital to get proper advice before making any decisions, the law changes frequently and is very complicated. Please do not PM me, as it is unlikely that I will respond.
  6. Well, that would be a legitimate reason for giving them this role. Legally you can they 'bump' someone out of a role to give it to someone at risk of redundancy (if the person being moved into the role is returning after maternity leave for example.) Although it's not nice for your friend, at least this way, everyone has a role, even if its not the one they wanted. If there was a redundancy situation, during the consultation a list of potential vacancies would be drawn up and it could've included secondments if they wanted to - I've known people at risk to take take even temporary roles on to delay redundancy, hoping something else would come up. If this was the case, it doesn't seem to have been handled very well. I meant to ask, are we sure that the new appointee is permanent?
  7. Thank you all for your nice words.
  8. I don't expect him to justify his expenditure, nor am I particularly concerned about the purpose of his spending in itself - he could spend all his money on strippers as far as I'm concerned I would never tell people what or what not to spend their money on, I just wondered what the pattern was. I agree that OP needs breathing space and a fresh start and I really hope that he gets everything sorted, however what we see a lot at the credit union is that unless there is a change in the person's relationship with money, people will merely run up more debt - and yes that is the culture in the UK, but I do not believe it is inevitable or desirable. If however, it's not the done thing on CAG, then I apologise and will stick to trying to resolve the immediate problem in the future.
  9. I can't really add much more to the excellent advice above about your current situation. I'm curious how your debt levels got so high? Did they creep up or were there a couple of large purchases that you put on CCs to insure them, meaning to pay it back? You mention 0% deals and I wonder if you've been juggling your debts and moving them around for a while? I can see that some of the debts (or at least the accounts) have been around some time. Apologies if this isn't normally done in these threads, but I would suggest, that when you have resolved your immediate concerns, you need to examine your long-term attitude to finance and your relationship with money. I mean that without any judgement or negativity. You are starting to resolve your immediate situation, you can see that you've got support and I hope that you can see an end in sight, even if it seems quite far away at the moment. It sounds like you have a good job and once you have some breathing space, I'm sure you'll get back on track.
  10. Secondments can't last more than 2 years for tax reasons (HMRC EIM32080), but that's really more about HMRC definitions of 'temporary workplace' and travel expenses. A collection of consecutive temporary contracts exceeding 2 years would automatically make the staff member a permanent employee, but again that's more about protection of employment rights in a place of employment than being guaranteed a particular role. 'Custom and practice' as a convention by which, if something happens for long enough, even if it isn't in the contract, it is as though it is - i.e. 'I've been working from home every Friday afternoon for 3 years and my ex-manager said it was ok'. I would agree that it is probably irrelevant in this case, as a secondment, by it's very definition, must be expected to end at some point. I think Emmzzi's question about a permanent role to go back to is important... have they lost their job or been returned to their old role? If the former, then they'd potentially have a case, if not, then I'd say it really depends on what has been said to him/her. I would argue that there is some grounds to argue that the employee could have had some reasonable expectation that they would be made permanent - 3 years is a long time to do a job. What discussions were had about the future of the OP's friend? Were they led to believe that they'd be given the role? Is there anything in writing? Were any performance issues raised? All they could really do would be to raise it as a grievance and if they don't get the answer they wanted, take it from there. I think it's highly unlikely that they will give them the job back, although the emp'er might agree to look at how they operate in the future. If they were then so upset that they felt that the relationship was irreparably damaged (and it was the fault of the employer), they could resign and try to claim for constructive dismissal, however, they would need to take some proper legal advice before they did that and not sure what they'd get out of it tbh. (N/B - I am a corporate poster, but not in the employment law industry. This is purely my own opinion and shouldn't be taken for advice or anything more than a pointer towards where you can look for more detailed info).
  11. It might still be wrongful even if not unlawful if the disciplinary procedure forms part of the company's contract of employment, i.e. they would be in breach of contract. I would imagine that they'll probably accept OP's resignation and move on - there isn't a lot more they can do if one party dissolves the contract. The majority of companies just use a standard reference, i.e. 'x was employed as, dates, then resigned' as they're worried about putting the wrong thing. OP could always ask what they'd do in that situation. They might agree to a neutral reference, disciplinary proceedings take a lot of management time and cost, unless they feel that they want to take it through to dismissal on principle obviously. (BTW - although I'm a corporate poster, I don't work in employment law, so I'm not posting as a professional in this thread.)
  12. Yay! We'll get you all, eventually
  13. I did notice the CU promotion thanks! I'm more than happy to, if it would be helpful or if it would save confusion.
  14. Hi all, Hello and happy New Year! I help run a medium-sized credit union. Although I'm not here in a 'professional' capacity, I'm happy to answer questions on CUs and add my thoughts where I think it may be useful. SJD
  • Create New...