Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yeah, I would confirm that anyway, as there is a separate sheet where I have to put in those details and my insurance number and driving licence number. That is on page 2 (page one is their allegations) then page three is a statement that you weren't the driver and space to give details who was driving. Page 4 is an empty sheet for a statement to explain the situation. So I will fill out my details as the driver on page 2, admitting I was driving at the time, and then attach my statement as above as a separate sheet. That should hopefully do it at this stage
    • Fraudsters copy the details of firms we authorise to try and convince people that their firm is genuine. Find out why you shouldn’t deal with this clone firm.View the full article
    • Seems OK, except that you must provide your details (as the driver). Include your name, address, DOB and driving licence number. This is to comply with s172 of the Road Traffic Act. Keep a copy and get a free Certificate of Posting from the Post Office.
    • Dear all, some information/advice required please.   I recently received a Further Steps Notice about a fine from 19/03/2018 which I knew nothing about. It was regarding a vehicle parked on the street without tax ( It was covered up and there because the only key to it had been stolen, I had been away from home  and I was having trouble getting a new key cut and coded to the vehicle )  I had not made a change of address to DVLA which would be why I knew nothing about the fine until receiving the final steps notice dated 29th April 2024 and giving me 10 working days to pay, although the notice did not arrive till May 9th 2024. I emailed the London Collection and Compliance Centre on May 13th 2024 asking for any information and they sent me a copy of the original fine. It is for  £390 back vehicle tax, £85 cost and £600 fine.  I now have received a Notice of Enforcement dated 7th June 2024 demanding payment ( total £1036)  or an arrangement by 6am 15th June ( tomorrow )  My question is is it tool late now to question the £600 fine part of the total amount to be paid ? That amount seems punitive.  Would making a statuary declaration regarding having no knowledge of the original court date apply ? And any other advice gratefully received. I am on Universal Credit and apparently they have already taken £177 via benefit reductions which I wasn’t aware of, but does make it seem strange that they were also unable to contact me.    Many thanks for any assistance 
    • Fraudsters copy the details of firms we authorise to try and convince people that their firm is genuine. Find out why you shouldn’t deal with this clone firm.View the full article
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Disability Access


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5947 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

My partner's office was relocated to an upper floor without any disabled access. He has a disability (DDA) and cannot now get to the new office to do his job - they knew he had a disability when they refurbished the building. Prior to the office move he worked with 100% attendance. Can they now make him accept a lower paid job (minus 30%) on the ground floor or force him into ill health retirement? If he takes the ill health route to minimise he losses can he then claim constructive dismissal?

Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the relationship between staying on the ground floor and being paid 30% less.

 

What job is he required to do on the upper floor and what job is he doing on the ground floor.

 

Are any other staff remaining on the ground floor

Link to post
Share on other sites

His office and all of his colleagues were all moved upstairs. He was previously doing a supervisory/office work job.

 

Just trying to find his rights out if they offer him an alternative position on the gound floor in a completely different department doing admin/clerical tasks but they are all on much lower grades.

 

hope that helps

Link to post
Share on other sites

if your company still own the ground floor and they have an area that he could do his work from there then it is reasonable to allow him to remain on the ground floor. It is not reasonable to give him a lower level job without pay just because the higher up people have high up offices, it wouldn't be reasonable to expect the company to accommodate him on the bottom floor if they no longer own this floor or if there is not a suitable area for him to work from there.

Any posts submitted here on the Consumer Action Group under the user name GlasweJen may not necessarily be the view of the poster, CAG or indeed any normal person.

 

I've become addicted to green blobs (I have 2 now) so feel free to tip my scales if I ever make sense.;-)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

No the Company own the whole building and there is office accommodation on the ground floor. They knew before they moved the department that he needed adjustment but ignored his requests.

 

I think what is at question here is what is reasonable?

Link to post
Share on other sites

To help give an opinion on what might be a reasonable adjustment please answer the following

 

1. What disability does he suffer

2. How is the disability preventing him from working on the upper floor. Is it a mobility issue and the building has no lift?

3. What does the supervisory/office work involve.

4. What resources are available to the company, is it a large/medium/small company

 

Sorry to ask more questions but the more information the easier it is to pass an opinion

Link to post
Share on other sites

sounds to me like he should negotiate work space on the ground floor doing his current job. I can't think why a general office worker would be required to work upstairs if there is no specialist machinery (like factory stuff) on the bottom floor.

 

IMHO he should request this in writing from the employer giving a set response date and see where it goes from there. Remember to keep copier of all correspondance

Any posts submitted here on the Consumer Action Group under the user name GlasweJen may not necessarily be the view of the poster, CAG or indeed any normal person.

 

I've become addicted to green blobs (I have 2 now) so feel free to tip my scales if I ever make sense.;-)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

With regard to maintaining his desk on the ground floor. I do not think this is a realistic proposition. The reason I say this is based on your description of the job as supervisory. Of course, your friend will know best about his job description and I can’t tell what the job is from your description. However, I would have thought that he would need to maintain close and regular contact with the staff that he is supervising.

With regard to re-locating him to the upper floor. This would require presumably a lift being installed. This may be an option and I believe the company can get funding to assist in the cost of purchasing and installation. In addition you state that the company is a very large company and therefore this would support the view that the company could fund the lift as reasonable adjustment. However, it is a significant adjustment and I have not come across a case with such a large adjustment.

With regard to re-deploying him and reducing his pay. You should check the company procedures as many companies will freeze the pay for a number of years after re-deployment.

 

As has already been mentioned. In the first instance you need to negotiate with the company with regard to what adjustments they can make for him.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...