Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

Working hours and business expenses


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5978 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hello

Really impressed with the advice given on here I have just joined hoping someone can help on a couple of questions of my own.

 

First of all re working hours. As per my contract my working hours are 37 hours per week with a clause added saying additional unpaid hours may be required in accordance with the needs of the business etc etc. I work from home and as a sales rep, longer hours are the norm and not an issue usually however currently and over the last year I have regularly been working up to double the 37 hour week to cope with the workload.

 

What is the legal position on this? I'm wondering how many hours in excess of the 37 contracted hours a week and over the course of months would be deemed as to reasonably to be expected to do (unpaid and without any time in lieu).

 

Secondly if company policy is that any expense claims have to be submitted within three months or the company will not pay them if you then submit a claim for expenses that occured more than three months earlier and your claim is rejected on that basis is there any course of redress legally?

 

Thanks in advance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pippa, Welcome to the club!

 

Did you opt out ( sometimes called a waiver ) of the Working Time Directive?

 

As to the expenses, if that is a company wide policy and is in the T & C's of your contract, you're stuck I'm afraid.

 

If I've helped, please click my scales.

  • Haha 1

Struggling_Simon vs Cabot - WON

Struggling_Simon vs Abbey - WON

Struggling_Simon vs HBOS - Pending

--------------------------------------------

IF I HAVE HELPED PLEASE CLICK MY SCALES

 

Vigilantibus non dormientibus æquitas subvenit

Somper in excretia,som solem profundus variat.

 

 

 

Opinions given herein are made informally by myself as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

Thanks for your reply (where do I click re the scales?)

 

No I didnt opt out. Problem is as a sales rep and working from home the instances where excessive hours have to be worked at the specific demand of the company are not that frequent. However in order to achieve company set sales targets, client deadlines and the overall requirements of the job it is just not possible without regularly working far in excess of the 48 hour working time limits.

 

In respect to expenses the company does regularly pay expenses which do exceed the 3 month expense policy rule ... for others and previously for myself however currently making my position as difficult as possible due to other circumstances (ie long term sick) it is now refusing to do so. Expenses claims for example have to be submitted online, possible only from an office and as I am off sick I havent been able to do so.

 

Also, in respect to mileage claims this may affect my mileage/tax rebate too. Had expenses been allowed I am due around £2000 back from the tax office for the difference between what the company pays per mile and the set rate per mile ie company pays 12p, 40p is the set rate so the difference is claimed. I'm not sure where I stand on claiming back that difference from the tax office if I havent been paid the 12p per mile by the company in the first place if that makes sense.

 

ie if the tax office contacts my employer to confirm the business mileage recorded it is going to differ hugely from the actual mileage I have actually done hence this refusal to pay my expenses (of over £1600) is actually costing me financially more than double that amount when adding what I would be due back in tax?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...