Very Odd Case, Please Help

[kay22]

I recently got employed as a delivery driver for an independent pharmacy.

 

To cut a long story short, the insurance on their vehicle did not cover me as I am under the age of 25. Obviously they knew this before they employed me as I provided them with my drivers license and other ID.

 

As soon as I was aware of this, I declined to drive the vehicle as I am legally not permitted to be behind the wheel of that vehicle. I was told by my employer to pay £500 if I wanted to keep my job, otherwise I will be out of work. I'm not really bothered about getting the job back as I cannot trust them any more, just wanted advice on what I can do about this. I'm just glad I didn't get pulled over by the cops or get into an accident, otherwise I would off been worse of then I am now.

 

Please someone help me, This should of not happened and I really need some advice.

 

Thanks

[orfoster]

Hi Kay,

 

I can't believe they are trying this with you. I drove for an independant medical company at the age of 19, the employer did have to change the insurance of the vehicle before I commenced employment.

 

This is really Age Discrimination in my view. A 30 year old wouldn't have to pay the extra money to do the job! I would have a look at the Age Discrimination Act 2006.

 

Are you a member of a union at all? If not you could visit the Citizens Advice or visit the ACAS website.

 

Hope that helps.

[elche]

Hmm,

 

Not so sure about the strength of any age discrim argument as the rule is being applied (assuming what your employer says is true), by the insurer rather than the employer.

 

Let's not forget that objectively justifiable variances in treatment due to age are not always discriminatory:

 

In some circumstances, yes. Age discrimination is legal for employers where if it is objectively justified. This is a strict test based on EU law. Employers would need to show that their actions were intended to achieve a legitimate aim, and were an appropriate and necessary means of achieving that aim.

 

If the employer can really show that the insurance was objectively much more expensive, then I aver, on the limted facts, that this could be defensible.

 

As usual, a question of fact, and dependent on the specific circumstances, for example, 'How much more expensive, as a % of the normal insurance policy?'

 

As an aside, and I am no expert in road traffic law, but, I think there is (or used to be) a defence to driving w/o insurance in the Road Traffic Act, where, acting in good faith, you believe that your employer has insured you, and it is a works vehicle.

 

No doubt other, more sober , caggers can check this!

 

Che, pero, un poco, borracho después el rioja

Edited August 15, 2009 by elche
writing style dude

[kay22]

cheers guys thanks for the replys.

 

My employer decided to inform me that the insurance does not cover me 2 weeks into the job. Basically I was driving without insurance for 2 weeks. Can I do something about that. Im sure he has broken some sort of law here.

 

Thanks again, the replys were helpful

[elche]

Basically I was driving without insurance for 2 weeks. Can I do something about that. Im sure he has broken some sort of law here.

 

Too be frank, beyond 'grassing' your employer up, not really.

 

You have not suffered any loss or injury as a result of the non-insurance, and your short service virtually eliminates any employment based claim.

 

Good luck with the job search.

 

Che

[kay22]

cheers elche, Atleast I know that I cannot do anything now. thanks a lot. Yep ill need all the luck:)