Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • What do you guys think the chances are for her?   She followed the law, they didnt, then they engage in deception, would the judge take kindly to being lied to by these clowns? If we have a case then we should proceed and not allow these blatant dishonest cheaters to succeed 
    • I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.  
    • he Fraser group own Robin park in Wigan. The CEO's email  is  [email protected]
    • Yes, it was, but in practice we've found time after time that judges will not rule against PPCs solely on the lack of PP.  They should - but they don't.  We include illegal signage in WSs, but more as a tactic to show the PPC up as spvis rather than in the hope that the judge will act on that one point alone. But sue them for what?  They haven't really done much apart from sending you stupid letters. Breach of GDPR?  It could be argued they knew you had Supremacy of Contact but it's a a long shot. Trespass to your vehicle?  I know someone on the Parking Prankster blog did that but it's one case out of thousands. Surely best to defy them and put the onus on them to sue you.  Make them carry the risk.  And if they finally do - smash them. If you want, I suppose you could have a laugh at the MA's expense.  Tell them about the criminality they have endorsed and give them 24 hours to have your tickets cancelled and have the signs removed - otherwise you will contact the council to start enforcement for breach of planning permission.
  • 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

Accident at Work


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4931 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

Don't go on Stars much but tonight's local paper for Sagittarius, Mrs Soaps sign;

 

"You uncovered lies and you're not quite sure how to act now that you have this information. You don't yet have the full story, but you will by Wednesday, so bide your time".

 

Solicitors in the morning and Nursie/HR tomorrow afternoon.....I wonder. Perhaps I should start believing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 232
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi Joe and Mrs S,

 

I still think the timescales stink!.

 

Also, they state that they 'de-classify the injury as an industrial injury' which suggests that they DID classify it as one in the first place, although if I recall correctly it was never reported to HSE by them.

 

So, we have an admission that they did consider it to be an industrial injury initially (which they forgot to report). Whether they consider it worth reporting or not isn't relevant anyway - Mrs S was off for more than 3 days I believe so it must have been reported (did we ever get to the bottom of whether they did or or not? )

 

Best of luck with your day - just stick to the facts.#

 

It appears that their line of defence quite clearly is that Mrs S has just made it all up - I think they're taking a huge risk by adopting this line ;).

 

M

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having shown the letter to colleagues they disagree with HR regarding time scales etc and are willing to corroborate Mrs S's statement if necessary.

And this is a very important bit of info for the Sols. He might ask you names/contact details and choose to speak to those concerned.

 

M

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Joe and Mrs S,

 

I still think the timescales stink!.

 

Also, they state that they 'de-classify the injury as an industrial injury' which suggests that they DID classify it as one in the first place, although if I recall correctly it was never reported to HSE by them.

 

So, we have an admission that they did consider it to be an industrial injury initially (which they forgot to report). Whether they consider it worth reporting or not isn't relevant anyway - Mrs S was off for more than 3 days I believe so it must have been reported (did we ever get to the bottom of whether they did or or not? )

 

Best of luck with your day - just stick to the facts.#

 

It appears that their line of defence quite clearly is that Mrs S has just made it all up - I think they're taking a huge risk by adopting this line ;).

 

M

 

Hi M

 

Thanks for your comments, very much appreciated. It shows that another pair of eyes is necessary sometimes, I never twigged about the "de - classifying" bit.

 

Anyway, been to the solicitors and he wasn't too helpful to be honest. We know that libel/defamation is difficult to prove and we know that we'd have to open a large can of worms to possibly prove it. I guess that opening a can of worms would be very expensive, OK if you win, devestating if you lose. As a safe bet I reckon he suggested that we start the grieveance procedure which we will do later on. Mrs S still has a few things to say to Personnel this afternoon and we'll go from there.

 

We know, and the solicitor knows that the company are trying to preserve their "Accident Free" status, they rely on big contracts from well known retailers to keep going. I'll update as soon as possible. Got a laugh though, after half an hour the 'phone went (receptionist I guess), he said "OK"; that'll be thirty pounds please!

 

But once again M, thanks for the support.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi M

 

Thanks for your comments, very much appreciated. It shows that another pair of eyes is necessary sometimes, I never twigged about the "de - classifying" bit.

 

Anyway, been to the solicitors and he wasn't too helpful to be honest. We know that libel/defamation is difficult to prove and we know that we'd have to open a large can of worms to possibly prove it. I guess that opening a can of worms would be very expensive, OK if you win, devestating if you lose. As a safe bet I reckon he suggested that we start the grieveance procedure which we will do later on. Mrs S still has a few things to say to Personnel this afternoon and we'll go from there.

 

We know, and the solicitor knows that the company are trying to preserve their "Accident Free" status, they rely on big contracts from well known retailers to keep going. I'll update as soon as possible. Got a laugh though, after half an hour the 'phone went (receptionist I guess), he said "OK"; that'll be thirty pounds please!

 

But once again M, thanks for the support.

 

No probs JS,

 

Too true about Sols, never make light hearted conversation with them, it all goes on the bill :D.

 

Yep, the "de - classifying" bit is yet another little nugget to keep should you need it one day.

 

I'd also make some notes asap on the timescale thing. While it's still in peoples minds. Make some notes, map it out, see who (colleagues) is clear about what on times etc. Again, tuck it away then for when you need it.

 

Best of luck to Mrs S for this afternoon,

 

M

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not much to report really. Nursie and Hr came, sat down and of course HR asked if she could take notes. We did not disagree with this but I took some as well. She listened to Mrs S' gripes while not showing much in the way of facial expressions. I repeatedly asked her why disciplinary action wasn't taken swiftly, don't know was the answer. We said a few things and I could tell Mrs S was fed up, after all, Senior HR is not going to be impartial is she, there'll all on the same side.

 

Mrs S said over and over again that she was not a liar, of course, HR did not really respond so she hit her with a bombshell. She told them that she was not happy with the nit - picking gripes, times of the accident etc and the fact that the action was a near impossible task, which it isn't so she calmly asked Senior HR if she knew of any similar incidents. Obviously she said no so Mrs S calmly informed her that a colleague had suffered a similar fate not so long back and it was reported. The Team Leaders put it down to a "near miss" which meant that it didn't have to be reported to HSE. How the hell a bump on the head is a near miss is beyond me. Anyway, HR was given the name of the person who had the "near miss" and the names of the Team Leaders. It was the only time I saw her face change, she nearly sh*t.

 

As Mrs S is on the sick with stress HR cannot take any action so will not write regarding any outcome. To be honest, HR was just interested in getting Mrs S back to work asap, possibly to take the disciplinary (which she wont) and move on. Made it quite clear that Mrs S wouldn't be back to work until SHE was good and ready. HR suggested that she could arrange counselling, get lost (words to that effect) was my reply. Counselling has been arranged through our GP. The firms counsellor will not be impartial.

 

Anyway, I guess this will not be concluded until Mrs S goes back to work. If they don't do anything, Mrs S will begin the grieveance procedure when she does return to work. If anything changes or I think of something else or need assistance, I'll update. Many thanks for the assistance so far.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It was the only time I saw her face change, she nearly sh*t

Hi Mr & Mrs S.

That bit gave me a chuckle.

 

Keep us informed as you've said. Looks like stalemate until Mrs S goes back to work then.

Keep any contact diarised and speak soon,

M

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Mr & Mrs S.

That bit gave me a chuckle.

 

Keep us informed as you've said. Looks like stalemate until Mrs S goes back to work then.

Keep any contact diarised and speak soon,

M

 

 

Will do M.

 

I forgot to say that I pointed out to them both that in the written instructions regarding health problems it says that "only OH can refer workers for physiotherapy" (a team manager harrassed Mrs S in seeing a physio) turning to the Nurse at the same time saying "and you are the author of that document". She squirmed a bit!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Well, Mrs S is still on the sick but received a letter from the nurse asking if she was fit enough to go up and see her. Mrs S is keen to get something sorted and as she did not feel too bad she did go up to see nursie. Although possibly putting it on, she appeared to have changed alliance (she has probably realised she wasn't the best of help at the start of all this) and was quite concerned. Mrs S told her to inform HR that she would like a meeting asap. Mrs S is now waiting for a letter from HR. She is busy putting all her notes together and as already pointed out , there are several issues to be discussed. I think the main one really is "can she go back to work for these people"? Personally, I think not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice to hear from you Mr S. Let's see what that letter brings. And keep plugging away at those notes. Could come in so handy further down the line. Hope things are improving for Mrs S.

 

M

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Fifteen days since Mrs Soap saw the nurse and advised her that she was ready to have a meet with HR. What has she heard......NOTHING!!!!!

What has happened? Well, pay day today. No pay slip received so I looked on - line to see what had gone in. Not a lot.

There's been no contact regarding a meeting, no letter explaining the pay position and as I've already said, no pay slip yet. To say I'm disgusted would be the understatement of the year! Even if Mrs Soap's full pay had run out, what has been paid isn't even the equivalent of four wek's SSP. I'm away for a think and perhaps calm down, not easy. Anyone wanna buy a house?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fifteen days since Mrs Soap saw the nurse and advised her that she was ready to have a meet with HR. What has she heard......NOTHING!!!!!

What has happened? Well, pay day today. No pay slip received so I looked on - line to see what had gone in. Not a lot.

There's been no contact regarding a meeting, no letter explaining the pay position and as I've already said, no pay slip yet. To say I'm disgusted would be the understatement of the year! Even if Mrs Soap's full pay had run out, what has been paid isn't even the equivalent of four wek's SSP. I'm away for a think and perhaps calm down, not easy. Anyone wanna buy a house?

 

 

mmmm. All a bit frustrating! Is the company suffering a "quiet period" by any chance? Therefore, in their own interests to keep Mrs S off of work?

 

Need to push for that HR meeting I feel.

 

Apart from that, hope you're well.

 

M

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

mmmm. All a bit frustrating! Is the company suffering a "quiet period" by any chance? Therefore, in their own interests to keep Mrs S off of work?

 

Need to push for that HR meeting I feel.

 

Apart from that, hope you're well.

 

M

 

Hi M

 

Not too bad thanks, NUFC helping by winning/drawing. Should be back where we belong come May, says he hopefully.

 

Not sure how quiet they are, trying to get in touch with one of her pals. I've texted/phoned the nurse twice already this morning as she's the go - between. Not heard a thing. Not replying, voicemail. The whole business is very frustrating.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi M

 

Not too bad thanks, NUFC helping by winning/drawing. Should be back where we belong come May, says he hopefully.

 

Not sure how quiet they are, trying to get in touch with one of her pals. I've texted/phoned the nurse twice already this morning as she's the go - between. Not heard a thing. Not replying, voicemail. The whole business is very frustrating.

 

Just keep plugging away at them. You're entitled to know where you stand.

 

Off the record, would be nice to see the black and white back up there :). West Ham myself - but we appreciate nice football and NU have given some good displys in the past - far too big to be out of the top flight.

 

M

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just keep plugging away at them. You're entitled to know where you stand.

 

Off the record, would be nice to see the black and white back up there :). West Ham myself - but we appreciate nice football and NU have given some good displys in the past - far too big to be out of the top flight.

 

M

 

Oh well, end of the day and not a peep from anyone. If still no word by Friday am, Mrs Soap is on the war - path.

 

I hope the new owners don't destroy WHU. Mike Ashley has his faults but looking back, after the silly spending by Shepherd (especially on Owen), he has got the club back on track finance wise; just a pity we were relegated though!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

 

It's the first time that I have seen/read this thread.

 

 

Back to basics!

 

Question: When the original accident occurred was it reported to the line manager and an entry put in the accident book? Such MUST be available to all staff, the appropriate managers AND the HSE.

 

If in the accident book and a more than 3 day sickness absence then the employer MUST report to RIDDOR. If they have failed to do this then any court in the land will look at your compensation claim favourably.

 

The HSE has a legal right to see all papers relating to this accident.

 

With regard to the circumstances giving rise to this accident. Was this procedure a regular occurance or a one off. If regular, what training and equipment was given, if any. Bottom line, had any Risk Assessment of this procedure been undertaken? The absence of a Risk Assessment for this task will work in your favour with regard to compensation.

 

H & S is my area, employment law not a strength! However, it does strike me that they are on a VERY sticky wicket given their treatment of your good lady. I hope that she is on the road to recovery.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not for long I feel :)

 

Looking good.

 

Hi Helford

 

Everything has been done by the book at our end, accident duly reported etc. Every event has been filed. No assistance from the H & S Executive.

 

Mrs Soap has decided that depending on whether or not there's contact tomorrow, she might just bite the bullet and resign and inform them that she will be filing (is that the right word) for Constructive Dismissal. She just can't move on and someone has to make the first move. We are aware that everything possible should be done to rectify the position but Mrs Soap informed the nurse two and a half weeks ago that she was fit enough to convene a meeting.....Silence from the employers. They are not interested, they are trying to frighten her..........no chance. I'm trying to find a sample letter on Google/elsewhere regarding Constructive Dismissal.

 

Any thoughts?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd suggest that you send a letter before resigning with an ultimatum of what you require.

CD is just such dodgy territory, don't give them any opportunity to say, "well, if we'd known how she felt, we'd have done something about it". Make sure it says "I want this, that and the other, by this date, or we will hold that you have effectively dismissed me".

Link to post
Share on other sites

Follow elpulpo's advice.

 

Blunt question - Is there actually an entry in the accident book?

 

Yes, it was written in the book by a first aider.

 

El Pulpo, thanks for that. We are going to do that. Mrs Soap had actually mentioned that first thing this morning but just got more fed up as the day went on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

So the designated first aider dealt and put the incident in the accident book, Mrs Soap was then off work for 6 weeks plus (When you started this thread). The employer had 10 days to report this incident to RIDDOR which they failed to do, you notified in their absence.

 

Bottom line the employer has committed a criminal offence and is now trying to say that you are in the wrong! Unbelievable. I have to say it's not looking good for them! Go for it!

Link to post
Share on other sites

As there was no pay slip or correspondence, had to check on line for her pay that was due today. Full pay has now expired and the amount that was put into the bank didn't even amount to 4 weeks Statutory Sick Pay. She hasn't been off 28 weeks in total yet (even linking two seperate periods). Had a quick read up and if SSP was coming to an end the employer should have sent Mrs Soap a SSP1. They probably don't even know the procedure. Now that we've looked that up, Mrs Soap is now expecting a termination letter!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...