Posted on behalf of a family friend who is employed as a wagon driver and normally receives a monthly bonus of £500 which is due this Friday. He has been handed a letter today which he was told he had to sign to continue receiving the bonus. The letter contains conditions which he feels are unreasonable and he feels are an attempt to avoid having to pay the bonus. These conditions include: The vehicle must be in immaculate condition inside and out at all times. (The role includes delivering blocks and concrete to building sites.) Your attendance during the month must be 100%. Managers discretion may be used for genuine sickness, otherwise phoning in sick for work will result in loss of bonus for the month. You will have a flexible attitude to work to suit the needs of the business. Any incidents of not carrying out your duties as requested will result in forfeiture of monthly bonus. In the event of you giving notice to leave your employment with the company your monthly bonus will be forfeited. Can his bonus be stopped if he doesn't sign the letter and can the company impose the new conditions legally? Any advice would be appreciated.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/benefit-sanctions-against-people-with-mental-health-problems-up-by-600-per-cent-a6731971.html 609% is a massive increase and shows how flawed the current system is. I have seen with my own eyes how the work program can affect people on ESA with mental health issues who have been found fit to work react to some of these pseudo psychiatric workshops they are now pushing on people.

hi just had front rooms of my house passed to a1. as i live in the town center and there are plenty of shops,small village with about 30 shops parish council being a real pain and have had the below restrictions imposed which seem ridiculous as there are other shops selling the same as each other why should i be so restricted any help pleas Following your visit to County Hall earlier today, I have checked further into the outcome of the Committee Meeting yesterday and an additional condition was imposed by Members to be included within the Notice of Decision. The additional condition will specify that the retail element will be limited to the wedding business only and no other retail use and can only occupy the front room and it will only be allowed to be run by the occupiers of No. 77. Members felt that if any other retail use were to occupy the premises it could have a detrimental impact on adjacent properties and the area in general. Kind Regards

Hello All, I am new to this site & I hope someone or a few of you on here may be able to assist me. Approximately 12yrs ago, I bought my current home with my mum (ex council property, right to buy). She was unable to obtain a mortgage on her own and I offered to buy the property with her, as I lived with my mum & my younger brother. A couple of years later, my mum moved out to be with her now husband and I 'bought' her out. My mum wanted half of the equity that was available at the time, £7,500. I was not in a position to pay it there and then, so my mum imposed a charging order against the property, which I agreed... thinking that I would have to pay it when I re-mortgaged or sold the property, which ever came first. Unfortunately, my partner at the time (later married & divorced!) left me with a multitude of financial difficulties, which had a negative impact upon my credit rating. I then borrowed £2,500 from my mum to assist with some debts that my ex-husband left me with, which was then added to the charging order, bringing the total to £10,000. Five years ago, I met someone else and he came onto the mortgage with me (I was unable to take on the mortgage in my sole name due to the bad debts). Since being with my new partner, we have tried to sell the property (to no avail) and have attempted to re-mortgage on several occasions, all in a bid to try to pay my mum off. My mum raises the issue every few months and she frequently monitors our lifestyle (we rarely go out, we don't drink or smoke, but as soon as we do anything, it is held against us!). In 2010, my mum enforced interest repayments of £500 per annum against me (5% of the total debt), which are due on the 31st December every year. I felt that it is not assisting me in reducing the debt so I recently suggested paying her a monthly instalment plan in order to clear the debt (£90pcm), with a view to clearing £1000 a year, with a very small amount of interest, followed by a lump sum payment of £5000 in 5 years time when my financial situation will be vastly improved. Bearing in mind, my creditors for other outstanding loans receive less than that per month and no longer charge me interest! My mum refused; she basically wants a lump sum. She is going to pay £2500 of it to my brother as his inheritance; apparently, the house (that I have paid towards every month for the last 12yrs) is my inheritance!!! Sorry to waffle on, but I thought I would give you as much background as possible without going into too much detail! So, my questions are as follows: Do I have to pay interest (even though I stupidly agreed to it for a quiet life)? Or would the interest only apply to the £2500 loan and not the £7500 original charge? Can she enforce the charging order, even though my other creditors have not imposed a charging order and are happy with the payment plans I have with them? Where do I stand if she does try to enforce payment in a lump sum? Am I within my rights to offer monthly instalments/payment plan as per my other creditors? Do I have to pay anything at all? Where do I stand in the eyes of the law having offered monthly payments to reduce the debt? Where do I stand legally, given that I have tried to sell my property, I have tried to re-mortgage (even with my partner as a joint re-mortgage) and I have even tried to get a loan to pay her off? My mum sees this as business transaction and somehow manages to separate it from our personal relationship. However, I see it as personal, seeing as the monies owed are to my mum and she makes it personal by commenting on my life and by actually being very spiteful at times! Any advice/help/suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Huge thanks Gracie99

I have an identical issue with Unicom as CAG member M1JWR (title 90days) March/April 2012. I.e. Unicom imposed their own contract after company merger. The information I am getting from Ofcom is not quite so clear cut, because 5 months has passed since being advised (identical letter to that quoted by M1JWR) it could be interpreted as acceptance. I can see from the thread that the 2007 Elite Calls contract is valid, and I have persistently advised Unicom to that effect. I have not agreed to accept the changes verbally or in writing. I cannot see whether M1JWR had a successful result & if so how it was achieved. I should be very grateful for an update if anyone is familiar with the case. My case details are as follows: The notice period extention brought forward the notification deadline to 7th June. It should actually have been 7th August. Quite by accident I found out about this on 5th July & immediately emailed 2 months notice to end the contract on expiry in Sept, a week or so later when it became apparent that Unicom were playing dirty I backed it up with a recorded delivery confirmation (to ensure I complied with the Elite Calls T&Cs). Unicom rolled over the contract until Sept 2013 and are demanding their usual £395 early termination fee. There is a further reason why Elite ‘wholesale business plan plus’ customers like me should be able to leave the contract:-Elite guaranteed no price increases for the duration of the contract. Unicom has increased the tariff; thereby customers should have been advised of the option to terminate because there had been a change of ‘material detriment’ to the customer. Unicom withheld the opt out information. However if Ofcom are right I could lose this 2nd argument as well. Its the Ofcom opinion that is is bothering me.