Jump to content

Sidewinder

Site Team
  • Content Count

    5,848
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    26

Everything posted by Sidewinder

  1. Security may well use the word 'fine' verbally but if that word were to be used in writing on any official document then the company could find themselves in trouble. What DX is saying is that only a Criminal Court or duly authorised body can issue 'fines' or 'penalties'. Anybody pretending that they have a lawful authority when they do not, could well be guilty of a criminal offence What the guard in Primark was talking about is a private company which will attempt to force you to pay 'security' costs relating to your wrongdoing. This will be a fixed amount based on the value of goods st
  2. Greed. Pure and Simple. They acquired the debts for pennies in the pound and make a huge profit when people keep paying them! CCA them and stop paying - they will be offering discounts soon enough. Until they realise that no paperwork = no payment at all
  3. The count is from the first MISSED payment as that would be when the T&Cs were breached and the lender could instigate action to recover the debt Forget querying the entry unless you actually have a DN with a different date on it. If Moorcroft were chasing then this would have been on behalf of the OC as they do not purchase debt, so the OC may well have issued a DN only after Moorcroft were unsuccessful and returned the debt to Barclaycard. BC then issued the DN before selling the debt to Cabot Has there been a claim issued by Cabot? If not then let things lie - don't poke a sti
  4. You will never get the default date changed - they can quite lawfully be placed sometimes many months after the last payment date, and it will vary from lender to lender how long it is left before they issue a DN. As DX says the default date has no relevance to the SB date whatsoever. The debt will drop from your file 6 years after the DN date, and the matter of exactly 'when' a DN was issued will only be relevant if the OC or DCA tries to say that a debt is not SB due to the default date - THAT is when you can argue that the cause of action accrued with the first missed payment (subject
  5. Only just seen this. It isn't clear from your OP whether you actually work for Tesco at present or whether you hope to work for them in the future? If you currently work for them did this happen in your own store or elsewhere - and did the guard know that you work for Tesco? If you currently work for them, then this could be difficult especially if the store is where you work, or close to your own store If you don't work for them at present then this will have little consequence - and the longer until you do apply for work with them the better. As a current employee this would be a c
  6. Please stop beating yourself up over this. Many many people find themselves in your situation and believe me a lot of them do not show anywhere near the level or remorse that you have. The important thing for everybody, not least yourself, is that lessons have been learned, appropriate help sought and that you move on with your life in a more straightforward manner. If being caught does this then justice has prevailed My guess is that the police officer attending sensed the shame and worry that being caught has caused and suggested that a donation (which would be to Tesco's charity partne
  7. Ditto - pay it yourself and submit the receipt as a petty cash claim or ask for reimbursement by payroll. The escalation appears to be that additional fees have been levied
  8. A Zero Hours Contract makes no difference whatsoever to holiday entitlement - all employees are entitled to statutory paid holiday to the equivalent of 5.6 weeks holiday per year Is it possible that they are paying rolled up pay - an additional rate to standard pay to allow for holiday? Not strictly speaking lawful, especially if you are unaware of it, but any statement that holiday pay is not required due to you being on a ZHC is absolutely wrong
  9. Mainly true, but all larger stores still have a Security Manager under whose guidance the guards operate Tesco will take no further action in this or any previous matters. It is done with and will have been passed to DWF, although if the case was made that there is a mental health aspect, this may not have even happened as there are clear instructions around who can and who should not be issued with Civil Recovery. That may even be why a charitable donation was suggested - as an alternative to CR. Were you given details of any Civil Recovery scheme before you left? A ban issued by th
  10. Can't add much to the above really. Based on what you have said I think it is highly likely that you will be dismissed. Whether they allow you to resign with a neutral reference is another matter and I agree that you must be demonstrably remorseful and accepting of the outcome before that can even be considered. It is also possible that your meeting on Tuesday might result in an initial suspension whilst they look at whether it is possible that you have stolen from your own store. Any such suspension would be on full pay. TK Maxx are not well known for their compassion in dealing with cus
  11. You need to find out - possibly by going to the original creditor - to establish exactly when the last payment was made to them, and then get the exact date of the payment made under duress. If 6 years elapsed between those dates, then the debt would have already been statute barred at the time you made the latest payment. Making that payment cannot change the SB status
  12. And Lowell will very rarely be able to provide these details anyway. They tried the same with me, and could only ever provide their own customer details screen which simply gave a balance, and addition for 'charges' and with no detail as to individual transactions and how or when the charges were incurred. They may not be 'obliged' to provide such details, but equally you are entitled to challenge how the balance claimed was arrived at - especially if they issued a court claim!
  13. This should be easily defeated - your wife can rest assured, although Cabot are unlikely to roll over without a bit of argy-bargy in the meantime First things first you need to go onto the MCOL website and acknowledge the claim. Tick that you intend to defend the claim in full. Leave the jurisdiction box unticked and save. Get a CCA request off to Cabot and a CPR 31.14 request off to the solicitor named on the Claim form. Probably also worth phoning Egg to establish the exact date of the last payment to the account If as you believe there have been no payments since 2010 or bef
  14. Unlikely, although some reference requests do ask for disclosure of sickness absence in the previous year Probably more that such a period of absence has triggered a measurement point whereby your absence will be discussed together with targets to improve absence in future - often under the guise of being 'supportive' especially if work itself may have contributed to that absence
  15. I am afraid that is not true. An employer can quite lawfully dismiss an employee on grounds of capability - that is to say that the employee, due to an extended period of sickness, is unable to fulfil the terms of their contract. Providing that the employer uses correct procedure - involves OH, takes recommendations, sets reasonable objectives etc then the dismissal would be lawful and reasonable in the circumstances. The standpoint is that the employer is running a business and the absence is causing disruption to the business
  16. Do not under any circumstances pay ANYTHING WHATSOEVER. Do not call them and do not write to them This is not a fine, it is a speculative invoice requesting that you pay an amount of money in respect of costs incurred by the retailer in dealing with your actions. I am assuming that any goods taken will have been recovered in a saleable condition? The security staff would have to be paid even had you not visited the store, so no costs have been incurred at all. RLP will tell you that hell and damnation will rain down on you if you do not pay but the reality is that it won't. But there will
  17. Threads merged for clarity Are you subject to any specific restrictive covenants in your 'old' contract? Would there be a clause for example that you cannot work for a competitor? Not that this would be enforceable necessarily, but it seems strange that your current employer should be asking this question of your new employer
  18. With less than a month's service there is no need to give a week's notice
  19. Thanks Emmzzi - makes the point that I was trying to make. The credit union is a party to the agreement and the rights and responsibilities cannot easily be waived by one party without the authority of the remaining parties. The nature of the contract would take it outside of the provision of S.13 ERA I am not completely au fait with the specifics of credit unions but there is often an overriding agreement between the employer and the credit union regarding the provision of credit facilities to a workforce - to the extent that if they were to start breaching agreements unilaterally this w
  20. You would need to know the precise details of the agreement with the credit union and approach it from that angle. I cannot see that you can force the employer to cease deductions under S.13 as the agreement is not between employer and employee but the employer is merely the vehicle by which payments are made to the third party. There is presumably an obligation by agreement between the employer and the credit union as to how and when those payments are passed on and the employee cannot force the employer to breach that relationship. The same would be the case if this were payments required un
  21. Recent change in US Government - wanting to renew assurances over who they are employing? Just a thought
  22. You will get letters. You must ignore them. They may be threatening but you must not be frightened. Come back here for advice as you need to. The rather warped characters at RLP read these forums and will probably write to tell you that you are getting bad advice from armchair lawyers who know nothing about the law, and how we are all unemployed layabouts with nothing better to do. Simply look through all of the other threads here going back several years and ask yourself how many people have come back to say that they were taken to court, or that anything happened other than the letters stopp
×
×
  • Create New...