Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by bartymuv

  1. well done foxy,

    i know just how you feel!


    i gave up eleven weeks, four days and nine hours ago! after 53 years smoking!


    i went 'cold turkey' as i couldn't bring myself to take any substitute as i may have become dependant on the substitute! (daft i know but thats how i felt at the time).


    i too have frequent spasms where i could kill for a ciggy. your spot on about doing something with ones hands, so i bought some joke cigarettes, and 'voila' the urge is gone.


    the only real difference i have noticed, is that i dont cough anymore, especially first thing in the morning. food doesn't taste any different (contrary to popular belief) for me at any rate.


    i am determined not to start again.


    good luck,



  2. If it is an unrecorded search it has no impact, \i use all 3 CRA's in my other life and have

    never seen such data.when carrying out searches.


    i too had a problem with credit expert. got my rating to 999 after a long time. checked it 3 months later to find it had dropped to 466!

    checked my report and found to my horror that every institution i was involved with was shown in triplicate!

    my debts had risen from £18000 to £58000.


    i contacted credit expert by email, and recieved a reply stating that it was because my name and address had been inserted twice (not by me). they would correct the input and all should be well.


    3weeks later and its done. back to normal, but its cost me £20+ to check! a nice little earner for the cra's me thinks.

  3. If it was genuine error then IMO no. ( good ob you spotted it )

    Maybe could get some compensation if you could prove you suffered as a result tho.!

    Have they now corrected the error to your satisfaction?


    hi ray,


    yes they have responded again, saying that they have deleted the duplicate entries.


    unfortunately im in antigua at the moment, so cant check my credit score. hopefully, this will have reverted back to its original status.


    i just found it incredible that these companys tell us how important it is to keep aware of our finances, by using them, and they end up ruining a perfectly good rating!


    thanks for your response,



  4. i pay a monthly subscription to experian, as i like to keep an eye on my rating etc.


    a few years ago i had to declare myself bankrupt, and since then have been building up my credit rating to a point where i had reached the top rating of 999.

    this was about a year ago. i didntcheck my report regularly from that time, as my circumstances hadn't changed. my debts (loans etc) amounted to around £18k and no payments had been missed or any defaults incurred.


    you can imagine my surprise when i checked my report, to find that experian said i had debts amounting to £57,853!


    i went through all the listed creditors, and found that all of them were listed three times.


    i then checked my credit rating and found it had dropped down to 447!


    i contacted experian for an explanation, and they sent a response which said that i had put my name and address in twice, so that was where the problem arose.

    as i stated earlier, i joined experian quite a few years ago, so how i became listed twice is a mystery to me.


    my question to the forum is, do i have a case for deformation?


    i am not looking to take out any loans in the near future, except maybe for a car, but with my current rating, i could find it difficult through no fault of my own.


    thanks for reading,



  5. sidewinder is of course absolutely right.


    i should have said 'we' opted out as a whole section, not me as an individual.


    on the other hand, we have opted out of having a meal break during a shift, and for that we get to leave an hour and a half early ie. 1230 instead of 1400. this suits us and of course the business.

    there is a tea break incorporated in that period as well, 30 minutes.


    we love it! lol.



  6. i opted out of the WTD.

    my company operate a 24hr operation which means i work a three shift pattern. 0600-1400 1400-2200 2200-0600.

    my pattern runs as follows.....7 days on 3 off, 7 days on 4 off. every 3rd weekend is a long weekend off ie friday saturday sunday monday.

    overtime can include a 0600 start, and finish at 2200 and then start again at 0600 the next day, or indeed any comblnation of all three.


    there is nothing that says we have to have an 11hr rest period between shifts.

    as i understand, a 10hr rest period is what i opted out of.


    working 7 days on may sound alien to a lot of people, but, if i was to suggest to the people i represent that we were going back to a 5 day pattern, they would slaughter me. if you think about it, people on a five day week would have to take 10 days leave for two weeks leave, whereas i take 7 days leave for 2 weeks leave.


    sorry to rattle on.


    hope this helps,



  7. hi andy, can you tell us if you were informed that you could bring a colleague or trade union representative with you to either your disciplinary or appeal hearing?

    if they didnt, it could be relevant if you get to a tribunal.


    your question regarding scribes (noteteakers) asking questions, usually (as i understand) you would be introduced to the investigating panel and each persons position explained.

    scribes can ask questions, with the chairs permission. obviously he wouldn't object because the scribe was one of his 'team'.


    i'm not a expert in industrial law, just a tu rep who has attended quite a few investigating and disciplinary hearings and all for one company. also none of my hearings have ever ended up at a tribunal for unfair dissmissal, so i cant comment on those proceedings.


    i think someone has already mentioned that even if your company didnt follow their disciplinary proceedure, it doesn't mean you will get your job back.


    i wish you luck.



  8. thanks for your replys,


    a brief outline of the case......a colleague of my wifes, a carer, attending an old lady, parks in the same place she has parked for the past 6 months. call takes 15 mins. returns to car, clamped!


    calls the clampers, explains she has to have car released as she has very young child expecting her at home. clamper returns 3 hours later. she argues that there are no signs and that she was on legitimate call with a note on her dashboard. clamper checks parking area and finds the notice on the floor, and puts it up in a temporary position.


    result, £75 plus £125 clamping fee =£200 for 15 mins.


    what really gets my goat with these rogues is that to contact them you have to call an 0900 number at £1.50 min.


    anyway, i'll let the lady know that she is dealing with cowboys, as i suspected.


    thanks for your responses,



  9. well, their not hanging about!


    got my invitation to the speed awareness course today, so at least i'll only end up with 3 points on my licence.


    pat, that doesn't sound like too bad an idea to me! me in one venue and her indoors in another! lol.



  10. well,


    got the photos for each offence yesterday, but no callibration certificate!


    niether photo reveals who the driver is (ive already admitted that i was, on both occasions).


    cant help wondering if i could have got away with no points on my licence if i had said my wife was the driver of the car on the 2nd occasion, thus giving us both the option to pay £95 to attend the speeding awareness course?


    oh well, too late now i guess.



  11. hi lamma,


    oh dear, i think i may have shot myself in the foot then as i made my request for photo copys for both offences in the same letter quoting both reference numbers.


    if what you suspect happens, then i will be really gutted!


    i'll let you know.



  12. i use the same route home from work every day, and have done for the past fifteen years.


    i am of course very aware of where cameras are on my journey.


    so, you can imagine my surprise when i received a notice of prosecution

    for travelling at 39mph on a 30mph road.

    i accepted that i must have been miles away (in my mind) and agreed that i was the driver and waited for the fixed penalty notice to arrive.


    went on holiday and returned on tuesday, and sure enough there was a letter offering me the option of paying £60 with 3 penalty points, or £95 and attend a speed awareness course with no penalty points.


    to my amazement, there was amongst the rest of my mail, another notice of prosecution, dated 6 days later from the 1st. this time for doing 40mph at the same spot!


    im sure those of you who have been caught in these cameras, will remember the feeling when you spot the flash in your rear view mirror, or you've seen someone else get caught. your gutted, but accept the consequences. the flash is really bright even in daylight.


    i can honestly say that on niether occasion did i see a flash to indicate i had been 'captured'.


    my licence has been clean for the past 25 years (which i was quite proud of) so, ok, now i'm going to end up with 3 points, no big deal, i dont think it will affect my insurance, as most companys dont take into consideration a 3 point penalty.


    i've written to the appropriate office asking for copys of the photographic evidence, plus a copy of the certificate of callibration of the specific camera, although i am aware that they are not obliged to furbish me with the latter. they only have to produce this item if i plead not guilty and go to court. (as i understand).


    has anyone else ever experianced a similar situation, and contested the validity of the camera?


    does anyone know how long a callibration certificate is valid for?


    the £155 is going to hurt of course, but not as much as the thought that i could have been so stupid to get caught twice in 6 days at the same place!



  13. hi hunterandthehunted,


    the one thing you haven't told us is where you obtained your flt licence from.


    did your company issue it after training and testing, or was it a requirement that you had to have it before they employed you?


    i suspect the latter, as no instructor would condone the practices that you have described.


    im not sure, but i think there have to be re-evaluation tests after periods of time (where i work its every five years) but it may not be a legal requirement, just good company proceedure.


    as far as your safety reps concerned, it doesn't sound as though you have one! or, he dosen't frequent the wharehouse operational area at all.


    any rep worth his salt would have pulled the practices you describe long ago.


    at the end of the day you are your own hs rep, your the driver, you operate the truck, you decide if a load is safe. it will be you thats prosecuted if theres a serious accident.


    im guessing your not in a trade union either,as they would have been able to voice your concerns, at a management level. once this is minuted, it would be a very naive company that didn't react appropriately.


    drive safely,



  14. i dont believe this!


    ive just had another letter, this time from Wescot!


    its for exactly the same account and the same amount.


    what absolute imbociles!


    ok, rant over. any suggestions as to my next move?


    i should add that its taken them up till last week to supply me with a payment card for the new electricity account that had to be arranged after they decided that i was vacating my home. thats nearly 8 months!

    weve been paying the bills as and when we received them, so we know both accounts are up to date.



  15. ive been a shop steward for about 16 years now.


    ive represented many individuals in that time, and have only seen 1 person dismissed. with photographic evidence, he still denied involvement.

    i tried to tell him that he should admit to being in the photos and let the company take it from there, but he wouldn't accept my advice.


    3 months later i spoke to the manager who took the hearing, and he confided in me that had the person not denied that it was him in the photos, he would have still been employed.


    the op here states that there was no representation on the shop floor and he had to call on the services of his tu at branch level.


    this person would indeed, in my opinion, have been very experianced, and would have spoken to the company prior to the hearing to ascertain exactly where they where coming from.

    if his advice was to take the payoff, then i would assume it was because he thought it the best option.

    after 7 years with the same company he could have taken them to a tribunal for unfair dismissal, but only if the company had not followed the written proceedures for dismissal.


    i have to say that im very fortunate that the company i work for do a lot of consultation with the unions before implementing any changes ie. to working practises, rosters etc.

    and their disiplinary proceedures are there for eveyone to peruse.


    ive seen newly elected shop stewards come in and start banging their fists on the table. its got them nowhere.


    its a bit like a football match, every fan is a manager and could tell who to play and who not to etc.

    the same with the shop floor, you have the guys who like to load the bullets, but dont want to fire the gun.

    there never on the list when it comes up for an election.


    these days you dont have to be in a union, but, the only way you'll find out if that was a wise choice is when you have an accident or an incident involving health and safety.


    as i said, im fortunate that my company accept the union as an integral part of the business.


    i would be very wary of working anywhere where there was no union recognition.


    just my thoughts,



  16. this is an article from PC PRO magazine which i feel is fairly relevant to this thread.


    the interview was with a woman leading a campaign for fairer broadband advertising in the uk. her name is colette bowe.


    she's part of an OFCOM consumer panel- a customer focused body thats independant of the regulator.


    the body wrote to ISP's asking them why consumers aren't getting the speeds they pay for.


    as a result of those discussions, the consumer panel has proposed a code of conduct that will force ISP's to reveal the true speed of customers lines and free them from their contracts if the speeds are 'significantly lower' than advertised.


    Q. what type of feedback did you get from the ISP's following your letter?

    A. it was a very good response. all the ISP's i wrote to responded, and 5 of the 6 came in to have a meeting with me.

    Q. did the ISP's seem concerned about the way speeds are being sold?

    A. thats quite hard to judge. the accurate thing to say, without sounding too prissy about it, is they were concerned that we were concerned. in several meetings, i had to point out the type of response that had been triggered by doing things such as radio interviews, when the BBC message board sprang into life with people expressing strong concern about the issues.

    Q. do you think the ISP's were surprised by the public backlash?

    A. not exactly. but a lot of the people i spoke to were very peeved with the difficulties of explaining quite detailed technical material to customers. now i understand that, but my point is these are your customers, find a way of doing it.

    Q. so your proposing an industry-wide code of practice?

    A. what were saying is there are some good ideas out there (in the industry) about whats good customer practice.

    we'd like to see an industry code that results in customers feeling that, no matter who they enter into a contract with, they're going to be given clear, transparent information when they need it.

    Q. but dont you object to ISP's advertising headline speeds of "up to 8mb/ps"?

    A.i have some reservations about that, which is why ive asked the Advertising Standards Authority to look into this. my problem is the prominence given to the 8mb/ps in a typical headline and the very difficult- to-read caveats at the bottom of the page.

    i understand the 'up to' and why its difficult to be more precise. but the relative prominence of the attractive offer and the the much less-attractive caveats that might mean you cant get the offer, is really my issue.

    Q. does Ofcom now have to heed your advice?

    A. it doesn't have to but, put it this way, i'd be very surprised if Ofcom didn't do something in response to this call from me.

  • Create New...