Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Dear Man in The Middle   Actually I should be thanking you   I have been impressed by your kindness your professionalism and your prompt reply   I very much thankyou for your thorough reading through my case and pin pointing every point   I was thinking of appealing the fine aspect of the sentence but you have made everything much clearer and it makes me feel better     Cant thank you enough for being so helpful and may you be blessed
    • HB.    What's wrong with" Girl done good"?  Not tripped over one of those politically correctness bumps have I.    We say, " boy done well or good", dont we? perhaps, well I do. Oh dear.   Apologies wherever necessary.
    • Hi    yes i already have -    the agreement  Notice of assignment  statement - but not fo complete period  2006-2016, and this is just printed on plain paper      So i will just request the Default notice and full statement on the CPR Form 
    • Thanks for the feedback. A couple of comments:   1. Before Magistrates arrive at court they have no idea what sort of offences they will be dealing with or who they will be dealing with.  They are given a list of defendants and the charges against them on arrival and that's it. Their Legal Advisor (the person sitting in front of them and facing the court) runs through that list before the court begins, but only to point out anything unusual or anything in particular they need to know. In a traffic court there is not usually anything to tell them. They have no papers given to them about any of their cases (except occasionally when dealing with trials or probation reports) until the case is called on. They rely on being provided with any papers they need by either the prosecutor or their Legal Advisor..   2. Your fine is based on your weekly net income and no account of expenditure is normally taken. It is asked for so that, should the defendant ask to pay in instalments, some idea of how much per week or month he can realistically afford can be gained. Actually, your fine was not harsh. On the contrary you were treated rather leniently. The guideline fine for 76 in a 50 is one and a half week's net income. £6,200 pcm is £1,430 pw. So your fine should have been £2,145. Your guilty plea would knock it back to £1,430 - one week's net income, as I mentioned in an earlier post. In addition to that you would pay £143 in the form of a "Victim Surcharge" and £85 towards prosecution costs - so £1,658 in total. Had you pleaded Not Guilty and been found guilty at trial (a near certainty from what I remember you told us) not only would you have lost the discount on your fine but you would also have paid £620 prosecution costs. A conviction following a trial should have cost you £2,145 (Fine) + £170 (VS) + £620 (Costs) which equals £2,935 (the maximum Victim Surcharge for offences committed before 28/6/19 is £170).   Other than that I'm not surprised they asked why you would prefer a ban instead of points and even less surprised that they chose points over a ban. I doubt your presence made any difference at all (which, again, I suggested earlier that it probably would not). Sentencing for speeding is very prescriptive and there is rarely any mitigation or other factors surrounding the offence or the offender which would significantly influence the outcome. Speeding becomes a very expensive business when cases come to court, especially for those on high incomes and very often a "view" is taken by the Magistrates that the calculated fine is a "bit steep". That's probably why you were cut some slack.   One other point which will probably upset you more than help (but which I think it is important you are aware of). Had your recorded speed been just one mph lower you would almost certainly have been offered a fixed penalty (FP) of £100 and three points. FPs are normally offered up to 49mph in a 30 limit, 65 in a 40, 75 in a 50, 85 in a 60 and 95 in a 70.   Thanks again for the feedback.
    • Thanks, they have just emailed this to her.   IMPORTANT - YOU SHOULD READ THIS CAREFULLY   DEFAULT NOTICE under Section 87 (I) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974   This is a Default Notice served under Section 87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.   In breach of clause [3] of the Agreement, reference XXXX, you have failed to pay the monthly instalments which fell due on 31-10-2019 on time and in accordance with the terms of the Agreement.   To avoid further action, please pay the arrears to us, which total XXXX by 04-12-2019.   If the action required by this notice is taken before the date shown no further enforcement action will be taken in respect of the breach.   If you do not take the action required by this notice before the date shown then the further action set out below may be taken against you.   If you fail to pay XXXX on or before 04-12-2019, we will enforce our rights and: Send you a letter terminating your Agreement; Demand you pay the balance due under the Agreement to us; Report your default and non-payment to credit reference agencies; and Issue legal proceedings and request Judgment for the balance due under the Agreement. If the arrears are not discharged and the Agreement is terminated, you must make payment of the balance referred to above as a lump sum. If that lump sum payment is not made on 04-12-2019 balance will be recalculated as at the date when such payment is actually made or to be made. In your own interests, you are strongly urged to contact us by telephone on 0203 757 1933.   If you have difficulty in paying any sum owing under the Agreement or taking any other action required by this Notice, you can apply to the Court which may make an order allowing you more time. You should be aware that if we take you to Court and get a Judgment against you requiring you to pay us the money you owe us under the agreement, you may have to pay us both the amount of the Judgment and interest under the agreement on all the sums owed by you at the date of the Judgment until you have paid these in full.    If you are not sure what to do, you should get help as soon as possible. For example you should contact a solicitor or your local Citizens' Advice Bureau.   This notice should include a copy of the current FCA's information sheet on default. This contains important information about your rights and where to go for support and advice. If it is not included, you should contact us to get one. If you would like to speak to us to discuss your arrears or the content of this notice, please contact us on 0203 757 1933   We look forward to hearing from you. Yours Sincerely,
  • Our picks

Pollywoe

Zero Hours contract for same work offered as alternative post following redundancy

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3640 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

I'm facing a complex work situation which contains several contentious issues. I'm trying to unravel the issues in order to decide how to proceed.

 

My initial query to this forum is:

if I have a schedule for 3month periods, which sets out that my work and hours are the same each week - is this really a zero hours contract?

 

Some context:

I've worked, in the same capacity, for my firm for nearly 15years. My current post has been declared redundant with a termination of contract date on 8th January.

 

An offer of an alternative post was made, which I've accepted - with a 4-week trial period (to run in January).

 

The alternative post is attached to a different type of contract: the old contract is permanent and covers 52weeks pa, the new is a permanent zero hours contract and is intended to cover work for just 36weeks pa (term times). My firm has moved to using zhours contracts for employees in my category; I'm in a minority of 2 who have a 52weeks, basic stated hours contract - and the other person is being retired. Custom and practice has always been that hours and work have always been variable but a key change recently is the reduction in the number of term weeks.

 

In practical terms, work over just 36 weeks (with only 3 months scheduled work at a time) means that the job is no longer sustainable as a sole or main means of support - but I don't have another viable job to move to and the redundancy payment is basic. I am very keen to avoid unemployment.

 

The alternative post has a different job title and job description but will in reality be for the same type of role, same type of work and in fact my weekly schedule for Jan-March, will remain "pretty much the same" (to quote my line manager).

 

I have doubts about most aspects of the redundancy and am considering whether or not to challenge.

 

 

Informed views/advice would be much appreciated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Pollwoe. Have you looked on the acas website or spoken to their helpline? My experience with them is good.

 

Good luck.


Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello thanks for you reply.

Yes I've been in touch with Acas and various other sources of information.

Acas adviser expressed surprise at the way in which zhours contracts are being applied at my firm.

 

As he put it: a zhours form of employment is more usually attached to a service agreement - to create a true "on call" arrangement. Whereas a contract of employment establishes a "master and servant" situation, one where the employee has significant obligation (and vulnerability to dismissal). The upside would normally be that the employee has some stability of income and expectations.

With a zhours arrangement the one useful thing to the employee is, as I understand it that there is the freedom to turn down work - without detriment. But by setting a 3-month schedule, it seems to me that my employer wishes to have minimal obligation at the same time as retaining certainty about the employees' availability.

 

I'm interested in how these arrangement work for people, in practice and whether anyone has established that a zhours contract has become a "normal" hours contract through custom and practice of having the same schedule over a period of time (I believe that this possibility exists in law).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...