Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx for your feedback. That is the reason I posted my opinion, because I am trying to learn more and this is one of the ways to learn, by posting my opinions and if I am incorrect then being advised of the reasons I am incorrect. I am not sure if you have educated me on the points in my post that would be incorrect. However, you are correct on one point, I shall refrain from posting on any other thread other than my own going forward and if you think my post here is unhelpful, misleading or in any other way inappropriate, then please do feel obliged to delete it but educate me on the reason why. To help my learning process, it would be helpful to know what I got wrong other than it goes against established advice considering the outcome of a recent court case on this topic that seemed to suggest it was dismissed due to an appeal not being made at the first stage. Thank-you.   EDIT:  Just to be clear, I am not intending to go against established advice by suggesting that appeals should ALWAYS be made, just my thoughts on the particular case of paying for parking and entering an incorrect VRN. Should this ever happen to me, I will make an appeal at the first stage to avoid any problems that may occur at a later stage. Although, any individual in a similar position should decide for themselves what they think is an appropriate course of action. Also, I continue to be grateful for any advice you give on my own particular case.  
    • you can have your humble opinion.... You are very new to all this private parking speculative invoice game you have very quickly taken it upon yourself to be all over this forum, now to the extent of moving away from your initial thread with your own issue that you knew little about handling to littering the forum and posting on numerous established and existing threads, where advice has already been given or a conclusion has already resulted, with your theories conclusions and observations which of course are very welcomed. BUT... in some instances, like this one...you dont quite match the advice that the forum and it's members have gathered over a very long consensual period given in a tried and trusted consistent mannered thoughtful approach. one could even call it forum hi-jacking and that is becoming somewhat worrying . dx
    • Yeah, sorry, that's what I meant .... I said DCBL because I was reading a few threads about them discontinuing claims and getting spanked in court! Meant  YOU  Highview !!!  🖕 The more I read this forum and the more I engage with it's incredible users, the more I learn and the more my knowledge expands. If my case gets to court, the Judge will dismiss it after I utter my first sentence, and you DCBL and Highview don't even know why .... OMG! .... So excited to get to court!
    • Yep, I read that and thought about trying to find out what the consideration and grace period is at Riverside but not sure I can. I know they say "You must tell us the specific consideration/grace period at a site if our compliance team or our agents ask what it is"  but I doubt they would disclose it to the public, maybe I should have asked in my CPR 31.14 letter? Yes, I think I can get rid of 5 minutes. I am also going to include a point about BPA CoP: 13.2 The reference to a consideration period in 13.1 shall not apply where a parking event takes place. I think that is Deception .... They giveth with one hand and taketh away with the other! One other point to note, the more I read, the more I study, the more proficient I feel I am becoming in this area. Make no mistake DBCL if you are reading this, when I win in court, if I have the grounds to make any claims against you, such as breach of GDPR, I shall be doing so.
  • 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

A very involuntary 'voluntary redundancy'


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5349 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 was made redundant from my position as a journalist with a weekly newspaper in Northern Ireland at the beginning of March this year. I had worked in the office for 21 years and for the same company for 26 years.

Due to ongoing health problems the job was ideal for me. I suffer from both a serious endocrine condition and significant sleep apnoea. Both are well controlled but the sleep apnoea which was diagnosed in 2006 led to the loss of my driving licence. It still occurs very occasionally despite the use of my CPAP machine and medication.

Last December the owners of the title on which I worked decided to restructure their Northern Ireland operation and sought applications for voluntary redundancies. The group editor and a representative of the Human Resources Department visited our office and painted a very grim picture of the future.

  • If enough voluntary redundancies could not be achieved, candidates would be selected for compulsory redundancy by means of a skills matrix.
  • Once the redundancies became effective significant gaps in the staffing of individual offices would be filled by the redeployment of staff from offices which it was felt were overstaffed.
  • No guarantees could be given that packages in any subsequent round of redundancies would match those given to the first people to leave.

I did not want to even contemplate redundancy but redeployment would have posed a major problem. The office I worked in was perfectly located for someone reliant on public transport. Its location also meant I could easily attend my routine but frequent medical appointments. Redeployment to one of Northern Ireland's more remote towns would have posed major problems on a number of fronts.

I e-mailed both the group editor and the HR representative concerned pointing out my problems and asking if they could give me any indication as to whether they would be taken into consideration if staff movements became necessary.

I received no reply.

I very reluctantly asked to be considered for voluntary redundancy and my application proved successful.

However, just before this happened the company's Northern Ireland Director of Human Resources returned to work following a period of absence. I made her aware of my concerns by e-mail. She did not reply.

Two days before I left I once again e-mailed the Director of Human Resources about the redeployment issue stating the difficulties I faced. Once again she blanked me on it.

I know all of these e-mails were read because I requested read receipts on each occasion.

On the day I left no representative from Human Resources was present. My editor, a good friend I have known for many years had to sign the papers on behalf of the company.

The representative of the Northern Ireland Labour Relations Agency who attended was concerned about the situation but by that stage my state of mind was such I just wanted to get the matter settled.

Had I not left a skills matrix would have come into effect in the office as all other employees 'at risk' had worked there for considerably less time than me and did not feel their redundancy packages were worth applying for.

The editor and deputy editor's positions were not deemed to be at risk and the editor would have been required by the company to mark the matrix.

Does any of this constitute unfair or constructive dismissal or have I signed away all my rights?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see a dismissal but a resignation.

 

Its not a constructive dismissal because I cant see that your employer was in fundamental breach of contract to you at the point you resigned.

 

Even if it was a constructive dismissal and unfair you are now out of time to commence a claim for unfair dismissal (3 months from date of termination of the contract).

 

I hope you got a good deal in your severance terms!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...