Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They have defended the claim by saying that the job was of unsatisfactory standard and they had to call another carpenter to remedy. My husband has text messages about them losing the keys a second time and also an email. What do they hope to achieve??? Most importantly,  as far as I have seen online, now I need to wait for paperwork from the court, correct?
    • The Notice to Hirer does not comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule  4 . This is before I ask if Europarks have sent you a copy of the PCN they sent to Arval along with a copy of the hire agreement et. if they haven't done that either you are totally in the clear and have nothing to worry about and nothing to pay. The PCN they have sent you is supposed to be paid by you according to the Act within 21 days. The chucklebuts have stated 28 days which is the time that motorists have to pay. Such a basic and simple thing . The Act came out in 2012 and still they cannot get it right which is very good news for you. Sadly there is no point in telling them- they won't accept it because they lose their chance to make any money out of you. they are hoping that by writing to you demanding money plus sending in their  unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors that you might be so frightened as to pay them money so that you can sleep at night. Don't be surprised if some of their letters are done in coloured crayons-that's the sort of  level of people you will be dealing with. Makes great bedding for the rabbits though. Euro tend not to be that litigious but while you can safely ignore the debt collectors just keep an eye out for a possible Letter of Claim. They are pretty rare but musn't be ignored. Let us know so that you can send a suitably snotty letter to them showing that you are not afraid of them and are happy to go to Court as you like winning.  
    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the 02/01/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the 19/05/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, 02/06/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
  • 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

Driving for Work - Personal or Business?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5386 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 employer seems to think they're entitled to tell you what to do during your own time. Apart from getting you to take work home with you, work early, work over, work through lunch etc, they like to tell us that driving to a client site - irregardless of where it is, is not business time and you must get there for 9.00am, normal start time.

 

There are things I like to do during my time, sleep, eat, make love, and do other things.

 

The other way around, the employer is very insistent about us making the time up for doctor appointments but they refuse to count the time I spent driving in the course of business. They say business mileage is personal time.

 

They're very quick to count every minute owed to them then tend to sweep under the carpet the extra 30 minutes you've done here or there.

 

The mind says that it is business mileage, HMRC allows 40p. Im not travelling to the client for my benefit but because I've been requested by work.

 

So who wins? Is it business or personal? Do I have any answer to prevent this abuse of my life? I like to do things during my time. I don't mind doing it if it's going to be recognised and appreciated and they're not taking the mick.

 

It has happened in the past where the employer expects someone to drive three hours on site, put in a full days work, then drive back. He's even expected people to drive down on Sunday as if he's being gracious in allowing us not to leave the house at 6am.

 

The company lawyer has advised a few weeks back that everyone should do business mileage during their own time to get to a client for 9am and if we refuse we can be dismissed for interfering in business.

 

Any thoughts?

 

Bob

Link to post
Share on other sites

watching this with interest.

 

i used to work as area manager (living in South Wales - covering up as far away as Staffordshire, Warwickshire etc).

My ex-employer used to demand i was in the 1st call at 9.15 and last call at 5.15.

Now, some of my counties alone were 3hr drive to the nearest account within that area (all good and well if i were staying away, which i used to do 4 out of 6 weeks) - yet, they still used to say that was my call structure and disregarded my travelling times.

They did pay for all business travelling as having investgated this with IR, they stated that all the travelling done to the call and back home was business miles.

 

there will be my own post listed soon as i have raised a complaint to the employment tribunal on a number of issues, but i plan to use the travelling within the dispute too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks janmal, Hello enigma,

 

I find it troublesome that just because they say we may expect you to work over at some times, that it means they think they can tell me what to do outside of my normal working hours.

 

The contract is quite limited.

 

Relevent bits

 

Work hours are clearly outlined in the contract, but goes onto say "to meet the needs of the business, the hours may be changed to include evening and weekend working and a reasonable number of additional hours at the discretion of yourself and management".

 

It even goes on to say that we "won't be entitled to any additional pay".

 

It does say that we "won't be regularly expected to work in excess of forty eight hours" per week.

 

"Travel to a client is considered part of the normal working day."

 

I don't mind travelling, but I just want to know if it is work time. If it is work time, I could perhaps have a bit of a get out under "Rest Periods" under the Working Time Regulations where say for example I have to get on the road for six, and not get home til eight.

 

Strange clause says no equipment should be left in a vehicle outside of working hours. That seems quite impossible to me when you have an appointment outside of work but are expected to take things home with you. Yes, work interferes with personal life that much. Or what if Im on the road on the way to a client and stop off for a bit to eat on the way before office hours?

 

The contract is full of rubbish like this.

 

Bob

Link to post
Share on other sites

if in your contract it states that "Travel to a client is considered part of the normal working day." then i would have thought that this means you should be paid for traveling time and your day starts when you start travelling as your contract clearly states it is part of your working day. i am no professional, just my opinion

Link to post
Share on other sites

1) it also states, "additional hours at the discretion of yourself and management", so are you agreeing to all of this or are you being bullied into it?

2) are you hourly paid or on fixed salary.

3) do you belong to a Union or not

all the above are relevant and also that in a recession lots of companies try to take their employees for granted as they can replace anyone from the unemployed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Engima,

 

Im driving a private car. This has nothing whatsoever to do with the recession in my mind, as the company has reneged on various deals, such as promises of pay rises such as when an employee gains a qualification, no pay rises in five years for very many people and the company keeps demanding more.

 

Although Im willing to do things as the nature of the job, the previous communication was that if we didn't travel during our own time then their advising solicitor says that we can then be dismissed for "interfering with business".

 

I would probably say it isn't bullying, but I would say that there is an unwritten expectation and I have known things to get messy in the past when an employee stands up for their rights. I've been threatened with redundancy in the past for not taking work home with home.

 

Pay is fixed salary.

 

I do not belong to a union. The company isn't that big. But still 15 to 25 people (without being too specific).

 

Again, Ive never minded going onsite, I just don't want someone to take the mick and expect me to leave at 6am, arrive at 9am, put in a full day, get home for 8.00...

 

I probably also don't have the energy to fight this. But I would like to know if driving for work can be considered work time - not so I can necessarily get more, but just so I can get it acknowledged.

 

Bob

Link to post
Share on other sites

I sympathise- working in field sales everything you mention that's expected of you I experience myself too. The biggest problem of all however boils down to do you dare to make a stand and rock the boat, or put up with it while trying to get out of it by finding a new job elsewhere in due course instead. The ideal would be for a few of you to submit a collective grievance perhaps however finding colleagues willing to support you in that respect is another matter.

 

Anyway...

 

If you have to travel as part of your work then time spent travelling to and from sites other than your normal place of work should be classed as working time.

 

"Working lunches" count as work time too by the way. They don't count as breaks - you're still working.

 

If you haven't already done so check if the company has a Driving at Work , Travel, and Health & Safety at work policies. If any or all are in existence get copies and see what's stated in them.

 

The Department of Transport / HSE gives guidance in respect to driving, long working days and driver fatigue. It does state that it considers it unreasonable to expect someone to drive two and a half hours to a site then do a full working day there, and then drive two and a half hours back home again afterwards. It says it wouldn't be unreasonable if the time working at that site was just four hours or less, but an eight hour day with five hours of driving too certainly would be. It goes on to suggest companies should allow employees to stay overnight in those scenarios. Companies are advised to conduct risk assessments, including doing risk/journey planning assessments before drivers set off on any long distance trips and each time too.

 

Staying overnight isn't always the ideal solution either - fine where its now and then and just occasionally, but not fine when you're spending three hours of your precious weekend driving there every Sunday!

 

The company sounds as though it's leaving itself wide open were a road accident to happen involving one of its employees in circumstances such as those you describe.

 

Regardless however, as you rightly fear, if you object and/or submit a grievance in respect to any of it, you might end up out of a job later as a result. Legally yes the company would have acted unfairly but proving it is another matter.

 

See what relevant policies they might have first of all.

 

Then test the water with colleagues to see if any might be willing to join in a collective grievance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never been one for rocking the boat if I can help it, but if I can splash the face of the boss in showing all the extra overtime that he hasn't thought about should an issue arise, then Im more than happy to do that :-)

 

They once had the cheek to tell me if I have to book holidays for hospital and dental appointments. Im under no such obligation I understand from ACAS. They have no right to interfere with my holiday. I can ask them to deduct relevent amount from my salary.

 

They once changed the terms and conditions of sick pay while I was off sick.

 

That's an aside, but gives you an idea about the kind of company I work for.

 

Bob

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...