Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks BankFodder for your latest, I'm in complete agreement on the subject of mediation and will be choosing to decline mediation, the longer timeline is not an issue for me, I will happily let the going to court run it's course. I really appreciate the support from the Consumer Action Group. I'll post the email text I'm sending to Evri's small claims in answer to their recent defence response. Regards, J
    • Sec127 (3) repealed, now gone. S. 127(3)-(5) repealed (6.4.2007) by Consumer Credit Act 2006 (c. 14), ss. {15}, 70, 71(2), {Sch. 4} (with Sch. 3 para. 11); S.I. 2007/123, art. 3(2), Sch. 2
    • We used to recommend that people accept mediation but our advice has changed. The mediation process is unclear. Before you can embark on it you have to agree that you are prepared to enter a compromise – and that means that you agree that you are prepared to give up some of your rights even though you are completely in the right and you are entitled to hundred percent of your money and even though EVRi are simply trying to obstruct you in order to discourage you and also to put others who might want to follow your example off from claiming and even though they have a legitimate basis for reimbursement. Mediation is not transparent. In addition to having to sign up that you are prepared to give up some of your rights, you will also have to agree not to reveal any details of the mediation – including the result of the mediation – so that the whole thing is kept secret. This is not open justice. Mediation has nothing to do with justice. The only way of getting justice is to make sure that this matter goes to trial unless EVRi or the other parcel delivery companies put their hands up and accept the responsibility even if they do it is a gesture of goodwill. Going to trial and winning at trial produces a judgement which we can then add to our small collection to assist other people who are in a similar boat. EVRi had been leading you around by the nose since at least January – and probably last year as well – and their whole purpose is simply to drag it out, to place obstacles in your way, to deter other people, and to make you wish that you'd never started the process and that you are prepared to give up your 300 quid. You shouldn't stand for it. You should take control. EVRi would prefer that you went to mediation and if nothing else that is one excellent reason why you should decline mediation and go to court. If it's good for them it's bad for you. On mediation form, you should sign that you are not prepared to compromise and that you are not prepared to keep the result secret but that you want to share the results with other people in similar circumstances. This means that the mediation won't go ahead. It will take slightly longer and you will have to pay a court fee but you will get that back when you win and you will have much greater satisfaction. Also, once you go the whole process, you will learn even more about bringing a small claim in the County Court so that if this kind of thing happens again you will know what to do and you will go ahead without any hesitation. Finally, if you call EVRi's bluff and refuse mediation and go to trial, there is a chance – maybe not a big chance – but there is a chance that they will agree to pay out your claim before trial simply in order to avoid a judgement. Another judgement against them will simply hurt the position even more and they really don't want this. 300 quid plus your costs is peanuts to them. They don't care about it. They will set it off against tax so the taxpayer will make their contribution. It's all about maintaining their business model of not being liable for anything, and limiting or excluding liability contrary to section 57 and section 72 of the consumer rights act.     And incidentally, there is a myth that if you refuse mediation that somehow it will go against you and the judge will take a dim view and be critical of you. This is precisely a myth. It's not true. It would be highly improper if any judge decided the case against you on anything other than the facts and the law of the case. So don't worry about that. The downside of declining mediation is that your case will take slightly longer. The upside is that if you win you will get all your money and you will have a judgement in your favour which will help others. The chances of you winning in this case are better than 95% and of course you would then receive 100% of your claim plus costs
    • Nice to hear a positive story about a company on this form for a change. Thank you
  • 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
      • 160 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

Please help disaplinary tomorrow need advice


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5421 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

I got a phonecall at work last wednesday am from head office, recieved letter thurday stating disaplinary will be this tuesday pm (tommorrow)

 

The letter states 4 items to be discussed....

 

1, Lying on a drivers declaration for insurance purposes;

 

Question 1 can you be accused of lying when the form states :

 

"I, the undersigned, hereby do declare and warrant that the above statements and particulars are true and within my knowledge there is no other material fact which should be disclosed"

 

My problem is that my boss wants rid of me and yes i did indeed have a claim that was not disclosed on the form but i was not aware this claim had actually been paid out as a claim. so i filled out to the best of my knowledge (IS THIS LYING) and as my boss was sitting with me to fill this in should she not have corrected me before faxing it to head office??? Also i declared all my endorsments on the form which total 13 points so why would i lie? see 2.

 

2, Increase in insurance excess due to poor driving record.

 

I indeed have 13 point which i disclosed above and everytime i have recieved a fixed penalty (never commercially driving) i have approched my manager and informed them. On the last occasion i told my manager and she informed me that if i kept my licence i would keep my job (totting up) and i even had a letter from my employer saying that which was read out in court by my socilitor and that is how i kept my licence.

i was in court 7/8/08 so why now. As i have said i have worked for the company for 5 years in august and my other points come off my licence (4years old within 20weeks) so can this be used as ammo now?

 

 

2, Concerns about your driving and the safety of our service users

 

I dont understand where this has come from i have never ever had 1 complaint or issue brought to my attention in 5 years of me driving for this company and any of the users of the service would verify that i have the safety and comfort of my passengers in mind with every metre that i travel.

 

3, Poor sickness record

 

Right i have had a lot of time off over the past year and a half as i am the main carer for my father and its been a very stressful time over the yeah and a half since he has been ill. my mainproblem is that my company often refuse me to have holiday when requested and also refuse to let me have emergency carer breaks when my father needs me if he is confused or ill. I have therefore had to resort to explaining all this to the doctor and he has immediatly issued a sicknote.

 

Not a member of a trade union... no trade union offered at work....

 

Also tuesday is my day off and also my chosen representatives day off and she has her grandson on tuesdays so not able to attend either...

 

What is considered 'adequate notice' i have not had time to speak to my GP as bank holiday to get written statement from him, Head office is closed today to ajourn meeting and i was at work friday.... so i have had thursday evening, friday evening and tomorrow morning... is that adequate time? how do i adjourn the meeting? At the meeting?? please help

 

Indeed this does not look good for me and i feel that i am going to be dismissed tomorrow any advice would be grateful.

 

Baby blue

Lowells balance £0.00 YAY

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can only help you with one thing, and probably not what you want to hear, but a sicknote from a doctor cannot stop disciplinary action, (unless you are on signed off sick on the day of the hearing), and you can be dismissed for having too much time off sick and indead dismissed while you are off sick.

 

Sorry.

 

_________________________ ___________________

 

If my posting has been of any assistance - please tip my scales.

_________________________ ___________________

 

Foreign Aid - taxing poor people in rich countries for the benefit of rich people in poor countries.

_________________________ ___________________

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for your imput i do appreciate what you are saying but although i was absent from work i should have been able to take carers / compasionate leave for my fathers care needs but the company refused this on many occassions and i have told my gp who will have documented this when he issued my sicknote.

I have never had a disaplinary before with this company and i feel that a dissmissal would be a little excessive for a first offence. it has never been brought to my attention, no action plan and no one has ever mentioned in my supervisions or apprasials about my absence..... I also have evidence of my manager saying she wants rid of the old members of staff from the company who were there before she started from a social network site. Should this be brought up at the meeting?

Lowells balance £0.00 YAY

Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as you have evidence and it is not hearsay, then you should always enter it on your behalf.

 

I have said printout from a social networking site the conversation was with my ex girlfriend too wich surely swings in my favour.....

Lowells balance £0.00 YAY

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...