Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I've used payslip, passport, driving licence, still can't identify me, everything is upto date address etc, 1 attempt left then it blocks me H
    • Thanks for the replies and sorry, as it seems I haven't communicated my question clearly. I'm not after advice about how to deal with the situation I'm in. I'm on top of that and sent a SAR to Scottish Widows the day before I sent one to the FOS. My query was around the FOS interpretation of personal data and the extent of their obligations under GDPR, hence the original title They have said that "personal data is defined as any information relating to an [...] identifiable natural person (‘data subject’)" They then define an identifiable natural person as "one who can be identified, directly or indirectly, in particular by reference to an identifier such as [...] an identification number. My view is that I have a complaint reference number, which identifies a complaint raised by me about the administration of my pension so it therefore indirectly identifies me If I'm right, then I believe that all the data related to my complaint is personal data about me, including the screen shot that purportedly establishes that I received my statements. I was hoping there might be someone with better knowledge of GDPR that can clarify whether I'm right or wrong before I react to the FOS's failure to disclose  
    • Please bear with me here i shall try and make this short but with all the detail, but i need help ASAP as there is limited time allowed for this process. I have been with my company 4 years and have advanced through the technical ranks to my current position,  we have an annual report which goes from 0-4 and for three years i have never scored lower than a 3. I was promoted to the role i am in now as an area quality assurance lead and the location was for the NE ( i live in the NW) eventually a similar role became available for another role in the NW. I asked my line manager if he minded me applying for it and he had no issues, i applied sat the multi stage interview and was given the role. My role is now classed as "at risk" of redundancy as we are moving from 4 regions to two which means they are also moving from 4 roles to two roles in my position. Two people are considered safe and myself and another at risk, my question is what is the criteria to separate safe from at risk . In the documentation received from my company it is below, i have zero issues and i know cv against cv mine wins, i was even selected by the company as a company mentor because of my experience in engineering and leadership. This is a closed group of maybe ten people and i am the only non senior executive included.    ·         Performance and Behaviour : I have zero behaviour issues, no issues with performance from my current line manager.  ·         Performance Improvement/ Disciplinary Records   : Zero disciplinary's and no performance issues, in fact my line manager on record has said I'm forthcoming ·         End Of Year Rating : Issues explained below Now my line manager was leaving the company and he did tell me "there was some politics involved with you getting that role, the city build manager and head of area build had promised it to their lead engineer (something they had no right to promise as it has to go though the process ) anyway from day 1 it became very clear that i would not be accepted for this reason within their community although i did just try to help them achieve quality and specification as that was my role. After a few weeks it became very apparent as to why the role had been promised to their man, i found issues where properties had been signed off as ready to accept subscribers when they were not ready (for bonus and stat reasons) and several quality issues i discovered which we could remedy and improve our productivity (unfortunately this would highlight that these issues had been there and not dealt with) My new head of area build (part of this trilogy of him, city build manager and lead engineer)  clearly did not want me there (for the reasons stated) but paid lip service, i had highlighted that i needed to walk off some structured with our canter of excellence counterparts ( as this was part of my role to link in with them for national issues) and he responded by saying i am not to walk them off, and that we have sufficient engineers to do that task (by saying this he could make sure that the engineers would take them round to structures that are A not the ones i have highlighted, and B would have very minor issues) This battle went back and forth over the months where i tried my best to build up the relationship with  them, my attitude was ok you have made some mistakes here, but we are all a team and even though you have hidden issues i can help you remedy them and hopefully we can do so and keep them off the radar,  but they just never did, So moving forward to October last year (2023) this is getting near to annual review time, now i had helped the company out massively by working a substantial amount of weekends and nights to fix issues, and i said i would take most of the time as TOIL ( as agreed with by my previous head of area build) this was 30 days. My current head of area build said i needed to put my leave in as it had been flagged as having a large amount. When i did input the leave (it would result in me taking all of December off) he was unhappy with me and was extremely curt in his responses as he could find nothing on the system for my TOIL , i explained the situation, my line manager would ask if i could work the hours, i would, and when i wanted leave he would authorise (we had an good working relationship, he was an excellent manager) he ended up going to HR to ask their advice and a teams call was set up with myself, head of area build and HR, it was confirmed by HR that it was a company error, when you want to input TOIL there should be a dropdown option in the leave menu and one of the options would be TOIL, this had not been setup on mine. So the company authorised the leave explaining that this should have been done and hadn't, i did say that this is the way it had always been and pretty much everyone on my team then operated this way, TOIL had never been discussed and none of had this option available. So i entered my leave from 4th December - 2nd January,  My line manager was an outside contractor and was leaving the company on the 15th December. On my return i found that we had a new head of area build, it would be a temporary position as they were not going to fill the position permanently and he would be covering his role (Scotland) and this role (NW). I contacted him to say that i had not received my end of year report yet and when would this happen as i had not sat with my line manager tor mine. A little over a week later my HoAB and i had a teams call, it was a introduction meeting and end of year report, he said that he had received feedback from the outgoing manager and he had given me a 2 (i have as explained before never scored lower than a 3) he asked hoe long i had been in the current role (just over a year) as this grade can mean you are new to the role and need a little supervision, haven't built up relationships with stakeholders etc. So he explained what my grade and bonus would be and if i had any feedback, i explained that this was unfair, i had proof that i had not met my targets (i say targets as there were never really any set, but going from emails and conversation we have had, and the job description) i had even created Powerpoint presentations which were very complex into how our network works from beginning to end  as there was distinct lack of knowledge here and i am a lead trainer / assessor (this btw he was extremely impressed with) He did say he had spoken to people in the centre of excellence which o believe was the head of operations, and he did look confused as to the disparity in feedback from them and the original manager that wrote my report. I contacted HR to raising my concerns that i had not sat with my line manager to go through my report,  had i had the chance to do so, i could have rebutted anything said as i had proof of my achievements even though he had set no defined targets, i could prove that i had been extremely active in identifying and remedying issues, HR did come back to me and these are their comments  1) "Your rating was submitted by your manager at the time xxx xxxxxx and he should have carried out an EOY review with you. The rating would not have been provided in this review but feedback should have been shared" [this never happened] 2)  Initial ratings where then discussed and reviewed during a calibration process (for your team) this will have included HOABs and RDs. During this session ratings can be challenged and changed. I can confirm that your rating was not changed as a result of this session and it remained at the rating that xxx submitted. 3) xxx did provide thorough feedback to xxx xxx in a handover so if not already done so it may be worth speaking with him to understand that feedback further.   4) In terms of reputation and the concern you share – ratings are not made public and are private to each individual. 5) And this first line obviously is incorrect " As far as i can see this would be the only separator they could have measured me on to separate safe from not safe, and if so the company did not follow its own procedure. My current line manager said " an error had occurred as you had not received the option to  sir with your manager for your review, and the company needs to make sure this error does not happen again) Well then they are admitting there was an issue and it needs remedying not sweeping under the carpet. All of this is documented. To remind the rating of a 2 is not a concerning grade. Please see descriptor below Generally, needs little supervision but does on occasion require direction/supervision. Does not always anticipate changes to the work environment and could adapt more quickly. May be seen as a strong performer in certain situations or by some audiences but may not perform at that level in all situations. May need some development or guidance to carry out some elements of role. May not consistently demonstrate the right behaviours. May have been on Performance Improvement during the year but has since shown strong improvement        
    • Also, what is the value of the dress and have you refunded the purchaser?
    • Simon Case was at the Covid inquiry yesterday. Finally. ‘Eat out to help out’ launched without telling official in charge, Covid inquiry hears | Covid inquiry | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Simon Case, who was responsible for Covid policy at time, calls Boris Johnson’s Downing Street the ‘worst governing ever seen’  
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Signs facing the wrong way


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5712 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

Here's chapter 3 but as previously mentioned, it is a draft:

 

http://www.dft.gov.uk/consultations/closed/trafficsigns2/trafficsignschapter3.pdf

 

Thanks. This is the relevant bit:

 

6.33 Signs should be erected parallel to the kerb,

facing the carriageway and sited at approximately

60 metre intervals. This will normally be achieved by

fixing the signs on every lamp column within the

restricted length of road. Where there are no lamp

columns or other suitable mounting points, posts will

need to be erected. Providing conspicuity is not

compromised, signs may be mounted at the back of

the footway on posts, walls or railings. This is likely

to be preferable where the footway is narrow. In

environmentally sensitive areas where the post is

sited at the back of the footway, consideration

should be given to painting it a similar colour to the

adjacent building (direction 41 allows a post to be

any single colour, including its natural colour).

 

While this is a draft, no doubt theref is a current version/equivalent which may say much the same thing.

********************************************

Nothing in this post constitutes "advice" which I may not, in any event, be qualified to provide.

The only interpretation permitted on this post (or any others I may have made) is that this is what I would personally consider doing in the circumstances discussed. Each and every reader of this post or any other I may have made must take responsibility for forming their own view and making their own decision.

I receive an unwieldy number of private messages. I am happy to respond to messages posted on open forum but am unable to respond to private messages, seeking advice, when the substance of that message should properly be on the open forum.

Many thanks for your assistance and understanding on this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

The signs further down the street (we didn't walk that way) were facing the correct way. I hope this doesn't jeopardise it but I would think not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

OK, just to update you all. I got a Notice of Rejection letter yesterday so I now have to take this to PATAS. Do you have any other recommendations for me at this stage as I have never gone as far as this before?

 

Also, is it better to have a personal hearing or a postal hearing? I would rather do the postal hearing as it means I don't have to take time off work and also I'd be pretty nervous to be honest as I've never had to go to court (or similar) before. If however, it's generally accepted that I'd have a better chance at a personal hearing then I would do it.

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would always recommend personal hearing.

It is nothing to be nervous about. Nothing like a court at all. More of a chat in an office (once you get part the formal part).

Notionally it is in public in that members of the public can come in and listen but I have no idea if anyone ever does!

You can also request specific time/day slots.

********************************************

Nothing in this post constitutes "advice" which I may not, in any event, be qualified to provide.

The only interpretation permitted on this post (or any others I may have made) is that this is what I would personally consider doing in the circumstances discussed. Each and every reader of this post or any other I may have made must take responsibility for forming their own view and making their own decision.

I receive an unwieldy number of private messages. I am happy to respond to messages posted on open forum but am unable to respond to private messages, seeking advice, when the substance of that message should properly be on the open forum.

Many thanks for your assistance and understanding on this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, just to update you all. I got a Notice of Rejection letter yesterday so I now have to take this to PATAS. Do you have any other recommendations for me at this stage as I have never gone as far as this before?

 

Also, is it better to have a personal hearing or a postal hearing? I would rather do the postal hearing as it means I don't have to take time off work and also I'd be pretty nervous to be honest as I've never had to go to court (or similar) before. If however, it's generally accepted that I'd have a better chance at a personal hearing then I would do it.

 

Thanks.

Yes, personal hearings are the best .

 

You can AFAIK ask for the attendance of the ceo under section 6 of the road traffic parking adjudicator regulations unless that has been changed aswell.

 

This way it put more pressure on the LA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, personal hearings are the best .

 

You can AFAIK ask for the attendance of the ceo under section 6 of the road traffic parking adjudicator regulations unless that has been changed aswell.

 

This way it put more pressure on the LA.

The Road Traffic (Parking Adjudicators) (South Lanarkshire Council) Regulations 2005

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK guys thanks again. I'll set up a personal hearing then. Any advice on what to do? It's just a case of resubmitting what I have already done in the first appeal to the council isn't it.

 

What's this bit about the CEO? Are you suggesting that I ask PATAS to bring along the CEO of Hammersmith and Fulham council? How will this benefit me?

Link to post
Share on other sites

My car received a "CPN" from Apcoa for not paying and displaying. It was parked in a what looked like a parking area of a road. Opposite was a clearly marked P&D car park outside a railway station. There were no signs on the side of the road my car was parked. On the opposite side of the road there were double yellow lines and beyond that was the fenced boundary of the car park. On that fence were signs with wording along the lines of obeying to the parking rules.

It looked as though, if you parked in the designated area of the road it was free parking. If you parked on the solid yellow lines you get a ticket. If you parked in the carpark it was pay and display.

I sent photographs of the signs and lack of signs to Apcoa. They have replied to say that "we have considered your explanation and regret the penalty is upheld"

By chance, I have not told them who was driving, But I feel it was genuinely bad signage that caused "the driver" not to pay. Should I continue with the signage route or reply stating that they should contact the driver if they feel that the signs were correct?

Please help .. my wife is putting more pressure on me to pay than they are.:rolleyes: It's the thought that we may have to pay more if we contest the ticket.

 

Many Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

By chance, I have not told them who was driving, But I feel it was genuinely bad signage that caused "the driver" not to pay. Should I continue with the signage route or reply stating that they should contact the driver if they feel that the signs were correct?

Please help .. my wife is putting more pressure on me to pay than they are.:rolleyes: It's the thought that we may have to pay more if we contest the ticket.

 

Many Thanks

 

If Apcoa are acting as a private parking co. on behalf of the private car park landlord, and not as an agent of the council (to enforce public road parking) then you should do nothing until you receive a letter from them addressed to the "Registered Keeper" (the details of whom they will have to have paid DVLA to obtain). Then you can reply with one of the letters from the stickiess area of the forum stating, "yes I'm the keeper, please write to the driver".

 

If you read through these many forums, you will see consistantly the advise is that you should never instigate the dialog with these companies, but only reply to a contact from them. (and then only once is advised with any other letters being ignored)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you,

Apcoa are working for First Great Western. I have read through a number of the forums but can't find anything that outlines any rules that have to be adheared to with regard to signage ie distance from parking space. The message from signs at this parking area are not clear enough as I managed to misinterpret them. I'm sure other drivers will face the same problem. Who can I go to, to get help in forcing Apcoa to rectify the problem. If it was a council owned carpark, I could go to a third party ombudsman but there does not seem to be any body to turn to?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh thanks. How will this help my appeal and put pressure on the LA?

 

Back to my original subject....

 

Could somebody kindly let me know what benefit asking for the CEO to attend gives me?

 

Regards.. Karl

Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to my original subject....

 

Could somebody kindly let me know what benefit asking for the CEO to attend gives me?

 

Regards.. Karl

You can raise questions. it is not unknown for CEOs to have dodgy notebook entries.... I was reading today of one CEO who was dishing out tickets because they thought the tickets had expired when they hadn't. they were adding hours and minutes on a calculator - in decimal !! they couldn't actually tell the time and yet had become employed as a CEO - so who knows what you would find.

And it keeps the CEO off the street for the day !

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks again for the input.

Out of interest, is there a min or max length of time before you can get clamped/towed after receiving a pcn on a yellow line?

 

I only ask because in the pictures that they submitted you can see the tow truck in the background. Usually it's the CEO that takes the photos after he's issued the pcn so I am assuming the tow truck was there at the same time that i received the pcn.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks again for the input.

Out of interest, is there a min or max length of time before you can get clamped/towed after receiving a pcn on a yellow line?

 

I only ask because in the pictures that they submitted you can see the tow truck in the background. Usually it's the CEO that takes the photos after he's issued the pcn so I am assuming the tow truck was there at the same time that i received the pcn.

 

No, the CEO would probably be with the tow truck, after any applicable observation period he/she would issue the PCN then its immediately lifted.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Check out the contents of

 

DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT

TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT ACT 2004

THE SECRETARY OF STATE’S STATUTORY GUIDANCE TO LOCAL

AUTHORITIES ON THE CIVIL ENFORCEMENT OF PARKING

CONTRAVENTIONS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Check out the contents of

 

DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT

TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT ACT 2004

THE SECRETARY OF STATE’S STATUTORY GUIDANCE TO LOCAL

AUTHORITIES ON THE CIVIL ENFORCEMENT OF PARKING

CONTRAVENTIONS

 

the relevant bit states...

 

Where a vehicle is causing a hazard or obstruction the enforcement authority should remove rather than immobilise. If the vehicle is parked where parking is prohibited (such as on double yellow lines), then the vehicle can be removed as soon as a PCN has been served.

Link to post
Share on other sites

on your decision or definition of relevant maybe.

there is PLENTY more on removal that that little snippet as well you know G&M. you are in No position to decide what is relevant only the OP is. you don't know all the facts but he does. I find your post at the very least misleading. Are you trying to help people or just get them to pay regardless ?

 

more of the guidance to follow. anyone with an interest is better off getting the original document and reading it.

get it here

http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roads/tpm/tmaportal/tmafeatures/tmapart6/betterprkstatutoryguid.pdf

 

further selections (inter alia)

54. When a vehicle is parked where parking is permitted, authorities must not33

immobilise or remove in the first 30 minutes following the issuing of the PCN,

with the exception of ‘persistent evader’ vehicles (see paragraphs 65-66)

where the time limit is 15 minutes. When a vehicle has been immobilised, a

CEO must34 affix a notice to it. The regulations set out what that notice

must35 say. The immobilisation device may only be removed by or under the

direction of a person authorised to do so by the enforcement authority,

following payment of the release fee and the penalty charge.

55. Where a vehicle is causing a hazard or obstruction the enforcement authority

should remove rather than immobilise. If the vehicle is parked where parking

is prohibited (such as on double yellow lines), then the vehicle can be

removed as soon as a PCN has been served36.

56. If a driver returns to the vehicle whilst immobilisation or removal is taking

place, then unless they are a persistent evader, it is recommended that the

operation is halted, unless the clamp is secured or the vehicle has all its

wheels aboard the tow truck. If immobilisation or removal is halted the PCN

should still be enforced.

57. When a vehicle is immobilised and subsequently removed to the pound, the

driver does not have to pay the clamp release fee37.

Edited by lamma
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...