Jump to content

obiter dictum

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


obiter dictum last won the day on October 22 2015

obiter dictum had the most liked content!


250 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Interesting one this. Got a demand today from a Private parking company called Civil enforcement and being hounded by a debt agency called ZZPS. Now they say as the 28 days us up i now owe collection fees and has increased to £170 It was for some kind of shopping park called Carnegie drive retail park in Dunfermline KY12 7AU NOW THE CRUNCH I live in Northern Ireland and at work at the time of the alleged offence No photographic evidence provided, just a demand. Of course will appeal and use poplar but any suggestions??
  2. Can you please go back to the original format. This is major confusing. The beauty of the that previous version was the simplicity of use. Can see people not bothering to post now. Not being critical but this new platform is a real turnoff. If it is not broke why try and fix it?
  3. FlyBMI have just released a press release they have gone into administration and all flights cancelled "The airline has faced several difficulties, including recent spikes in fuel and carbon costs, the latter arising from the EU’s recent decision to exclude UK airlines from full participation in the Emissions Trading Scheme. "These issues have undermined efforts to move the airline into profit. "Current trading and future prospects have also been seriously affected by the uncertainty created by the Brexit process, which has led to our inability to secure valuable flying contracts in Europe and lack of confidence around bmi’s ability to continue flying between destinations in Europe. Might shake up Parliament a bit now reality starts to bite
  4. And in rebuttal capability was never mentioned or dismissal being reasonable or proportionate. The issue was putting in control measures to limit further harm to enable the employee to stay in the job. Dismissal on capability has never been in doubt as a last resort and have stated nothing to the contrary
  5. If a person has any condition that has the capability to impact health and safety, be it the are disabled or not, the obligation under statute is on the employer and employee to limit that harm. Disabled or not. That includes putting in control measures where and when appropriate to limit possible harm And for the record no such thing now as the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) It is the Equality Act 2010
  6. Sorry have to disagree Regulation 3 Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 Even Section 2 Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 What is reasonable and proportionate in achieving a legitimate aim Although you are correct that the employer does not have to instigate any reasonable adjustments if not covered under the act, If the employee or any individual not in the employ of the business suffers a detriment because of that decision when previously notified , the employer can and will be held liable in any civil/criminal proceedings
  7. It is a misconception you have to be covered under the act for reasonable adjustments to be made. They have to be made under a statutory duty of care with risk assessments
  8. Apologise if already covered but?? Has Occupational Health given a decision in their report that they consider your condition to be a disability under the Equality Act 2010??
  9. It is obvious after today's "Sod Off" to May, Article 50 will have to be extended. They have had over two years. There is still so much legislation that still has not been repealed or past
  10. obiter dictum


    Item not as described Consumer Rights Act
  11. So the question has to be what is the point of having an industry code of practice that means squat in reality?
  12. Just updating as just had a full and final from the Financial Ombudsman They have sided with the Finance Company. My beef was that they sold the car at auction without me having the opportunity to have it independently inspected to refute damage claims with fair wear and tear. They have asked me to sign a form that i accept or reject the decision Response The car was sold at auction before Mr xxx had complained to xxxxxx Finance -so it was not possible to have the car to be inspected. I am not persuaded that Mr xxx has a contractual or statutory right to have the car independently inspected. And i do not consider XXXXX Finance acted incorrectly in selling the car
  • Create New...