Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Meat smugglers using English vehicles to evade border checks - Farmers Weekly WWW.FWI.CO.UK Criminal gangs are buying English-registered coaches and vans to smuggle large amounts of illegal meat into the country, Farmers Weekly has learned.  
    • I've used payslip, passport, driving licence, still can't identify me, everything is upto date address etc, 1 attempt left then it blocks me H
    • Thanks for the replies and sorry, as it seems I haven't communicated my question clearly. I'm not after advice about how to deal with the situation I'm in. I'm on top of that and sent a SAR to Scottish Widows the day before I sent one to the FOS. My query was around the FOS interpretation of personal data and the extent of their obligations under GDPR, hence the original title They have said that "personal data is defined as any information relating to an [...] identifiable natural person (‘data subject’)" They then define an identifiable natural person as "one who can be identified, directly or indirectly, in particular by reference to an identifier such as [...] an identification number. My view is that I have a complaint reference number, which identifies a complaint raised by me about the administration of my pension so it therefore indirectly identifies me If I'm right, then I believe that all the data related to my complaint is personal data about me, including the screen shot that purportedly establishes that I received my statements. I was hoping there might be someone with better knowledge of GDPR that can clarify whether I'm right or wrong before I react to the FOS's failure to disclose  
    • Please bear with me here i shall try and make this short but with all the detail, but i need help ASAP as there is limited time allowed for this process. I have been with my company 4 years and have advanced through the technical ranks to my current position,  we have an annual report which goes from 0-4 and for three years i have never scored lower than a 3. I was promoted to the role i am in now as an area quality assurance lead and the location was for the NE ( i live in the NW) eventually a similar role became available for another role in the NW. I asked my line manager if he minded me applying for it and he had no issues, i applied sat the multi stage interview and was given the role. My role is now classed as "at risk" of redundancy as we are moving from 4 regions to two which means they are also moving from 4 roles to two roles in my position. Two people are considered safe and myself and another at risk, my question is what is the criteria to separate safe from at risk . In the documentation received from my company it is below, i have zero issues and i know cv against cv mine wins, i was even selected by the company as a company mentor because of my experience in engineering and leadership. This is a closed group of maybe ten people and i am the only non senior executive included.    ·         Performance and Behaviour : I have zero behaviour issues, no issues with performance from my current line manager.  ·         Performance Improvement/ Disciplinary Records   : Zero disciplinary's and no performance issues, in fact my line manager on record has said I'm forthcoming ·         End Of Year Rating : Issues explained below Now my line manager was leaving the company and he did tell me "there was some politics involved with you getting that role, the city build manager and head of area build had promised it to their lead engineer (something they had no right to promise as it has to go though the process ) anyway from day 1 it became very clear that i would not be accepted for this reason within their community although i did just try to help them achieve quality and specification as that was my role. After a few weeks it became very apparent as to why the role had been promised to their man, i found issues where properties had been signed off as ready to accept subscribers when they were not ready (for bonus and stat reasons) and several quality issues i discovered which we could remedy and improve our productivity (unfortunately this would highlight that these issues had been there and not dealt with) My new head of area build (part of this trilogy of him, city build manager and lead engineer)  clearly did not want me there (for the reasons stated) but paid lip service, i had highlighted that i needed to walk off some structured with our canter of excellence counterparts ( as this was part of my role to link in with them for national issues) and he responded by saying i am not to walk them off, and that we have sufficient engineers to do that task (by saying this he could make sure that the engineers would take them round to structures that are A not the ones i have highlighted, and B would have very minor issues) This battle went back and forth over the months where i tried my best to build up the relationship with  them, my attitude was ok you have made some mistakes here, but we are all a team and even though you have hidden issues i can help you remedy them and hopefully we can do so and keep them off the radar,  but they just never did, So moving forward to October last year (2023) this is getting near to annual review time, now i had helped the company out massively by working a substantial amount of weekends and nights to fix issues, and i said i would take most of the time as TOIL ( as agreed with by my previous head of area build) this was 30 days. My current head of area build said i needed to put my leave in as it had been flagged as having a large amount. When i did input the leave (it would result in me taking all of December off) he was unhappy with me and was extremely curt in his responses as he could find nothing on the system for my TOIL , i explained the situation, my line manager would ask if i could work the hours, i would, and when i wanted leave he would authorise (we had an good working relationship, he was an excellent manager) he ended up going to HR to ask their advice and a teams call was set up with myself, head of area build and HR, it was confirmed by HR that it was a company error, when you want to input TOIL there should be a dropdown option in the leave menu and one of the options would be TOIL, this had not been setup on mine. So the company authorised the leave explaining that this should have been done and hadn't, i did say that this is the way it had always been and pretty much everyone on my team then operated this way, TOIL had never been discussed and none of had this option available. So i entered my leave from 4th December - 2nd January,  My line manager was an outside contractor and was leaving the company on the 15th December. On my return i found that we had a new head of area build, it would be a temporary position as they were not going to fill the position permanently and he would be covering his role (Scotland) and this role (NW). I contacted him to say that i had not received my end of year report yet and when would this happen as i had not sat with my line manager tor mine. A little over a week later my HoAB and i had a teams call, it was a introduction meeting and end of year report, he said that he had received feedback from the outgoing manager and he had given me a 2 (i have as explained before never scored lower than a 3) he asked hoe long i had been in the current role (just over a year) as this grade can mean you are new to the role and need a little supervision, haven't built up relationships with stakeholders etc. So he explained what my grade and bonus would be and if i had any feedback, i explained that this was unfair, i had proof that i had not met my targets (i say targets as there were never really any set, but going from emails and conversation we have had, and the job description) i had even created Powerpoint presentations which were very complex into how our network works from beginning to end  as there was distinct lack of knowledge here and i am a lead trainer / assessor (this btw he was extremely impressed with) He did say he had spoken to people in the centre of excellence which o believe was the head of operations, and he did look confused as to the disparity in feedback from them and the original manager that wrote my report. I contacted HR to raising my concerns that i had not sat with my line manager to go through my report,  had i had the chance to do so, i could have rebutted anything said as i had proof of my achievements even though he had set no defined targets, i could prove that i had been extremely active in identifying and remedying issues, HR did come back to me and these are their comments  1) "Your rating was submitted by your manager at the time xxx xxxxxx and he should have carried out an EOY review with you. The rating would not have been provided in this review but feedback should have been shared" [this never happened] 2)  Initial ratings where then discussed and reviewed during a calibration process (for your team) this will have included HOABs and RDs. During this session ratings can be challenged and changed. I can confirm that your rating was not changed as a result of this session and it remained at the rating that xxx submitted. 3) xxx did provide thorough feedback to xxx xxx in a handover so if not already done so it may be worth speaking with him to understand that feedback further.   4) In terms of reputation and the concern you share – ratings are not made public and are private to each individual. 5) And this first line obviously is incorrect " As far as i can see this would be the only separator they could have measured me on to separate safe from not safe, and if so the company did not follow its own procedure. My current line manager said " an error had occurred as you had not received the option to  sir with your manager for your review, and the company needs to make sure this error does not happen again) Well then they are admitting there was an issue and it needs remedying not sweeping under the carpet. All of this is documented. To remind the rating of a 2 is not a concerning grade. Please see descriptor below Generally, needs little supervision but does on occasion require direction/supervision. Does not always anticipate changes to the work environment and could adapt more quickly. May be seen as a strong performer in certain situations or by some audiences but may not perform at that level in all situations. May need some development or guidance to carry out some elements of role. May not consistently demonstrate the right behaviours. May have been on Performance Improvement during the year but has since shown strong improvement        
    • Also, what is the value of the dress and have you refunded the purchaser?
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

pls help!appeal hearing soon.


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5191 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

well guys,thanks for all your help and advice,compiled our plan now.of to london tomorrow for meeting thursday at 9am.

wishing us luck.

cheers again,will let you no outcome as soon as we back.

laingy

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 70
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

hi all,

 

sorry in delay in letting you all know the outcome.

 

Basically after 2hours of the meeting being conducted the outcome was as follows.

 

wether he has a contract or not it would had no bearing on the outcome as it was "theft".

 

they covered up all there "procedurral errors".

 

The fact that his manager did the same thing the week before(on a far worse scale) and they we aware of it(as he got in there to tell them,to cover himself) they said "thats how they work".

however they did not see fit for them to allow my son to do it.

 

"beneficial favours to the company" to them means when they see fit !

 

they informed us that they had been investigating all sub-contractors and "unfortunately" my son got caught up in that fact and basically gave them what they were looking for.

 

they did say on one hand they felt sympathy for my son and it was unfortunate.

 

when asked for all copies of eg.employment contracts,disaplinary procedures,evidence of all etc.

there reply to that was"so you are going to make us do 6 months work for nothing as it was theft.

 

this next bit is the stinger.

 

if we were to choose to continue with the appeal they would get the police involved.

 

BLACKMAIL

 

they knew they failed him,never protected him or themselves,they also knew we had a good case for all our reasons,but choose to comeback with a blackmail.

 

my son has learned a very harse lesson by this,never trust anyone,dont assume that when a manager is training you what he does is acceptable.

 

so we were stuffed!

 

im sure you will have comments on this.

 

cheers for all your support and advice anyway.

 

laingy

Link to post
Share on other sites

How frustrating for you laingy. This sounds like a stitch up. I'm sure there will be comments, hope the swearing filter is switched on!

 

Do you have any of this in writing? I don't like their attitude at all, but having been on this forum for a while, am not all that surprised, sadly. Some people seem to stop at nothing.

 

All of this is outside my experience, but remind us how long ago the alleged theft was? And if they call in the police, do they have evidence?

 

So they admitted they never did all the paperwork when your son joined? I don't know where that leaves them legally, as it's still a requirement. Anyone?

 

There are lots of unfair aspects to this, but the complication is the police, isn't it? I hope someone will have comments on this later.

 

My best to you and your son. x

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

What a shower of whatevers, eh?

 

They're having a laugh saying they will get the police involved.

The police wouldn't be remotely interested in a bloke on a building site giving another bloke a piece of wood.

If you can get proof of them threatening that it would really help your case.

I'd wait until you get the written outcome of the appeal (if they can manage to send you that), then send them a letter before action.

Link to post
Share on other sites

honeybee he was stitched up!!

 

hubby asked at the start "was there anything to disclose" but they avoided that by telling him"your not allowed to speak".

however after a while everyone was speaking so he joined in, they were never going to show us anything.

 

lets be honest they didnt need to ,there ace up the sleeve was the word "police". and they knew that !!!

they could of been bluffing,but we are not prepared for my son to have a criminal record,and they knew that !!!!

 

yes it was "theft" as such but with very much mitagating circumstances.

 

They have used him as a scape goat without a doubt,by getting him they got the sub-contractor they were investigating and as we were led to believe over a period of time he has had a fair bit of stuff from various sites.

cheers

laingy

Link to post
Share on other sites

elpulpo,

understand what you are saying,

but they could potientially prosecute,as he openly admitted giving it away.

thats were the blackmail came in.

in other words"we no you can get us on no contract etc,etc,etc,

BUT if you do we will have you done.

 

our hands our tied.

yes a SHOWER OF !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi laingy. Don't give up yet. I see what Elpulpo is getting at and wonder how impressed the police would be if they got mixed up in this. And if they called in the police, wouldn't that end up involving the sub-contractor for receiving stolen goods? And then, would they end up finding the manager who handed over far more?

 

I quite see your son doesn't want a criminal record, but maybe there's a way round this. Do we have anyone who understands police procedures and the law?

 

I hope the rats confirm in writing. Of course if they don't, that could go against them? :)

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I just can't imagine that there would ever be a prosecution for what was an established practice of essentially barter over an insignificant piece of building material.

It's up to you, but if I was in your situation I'd call their bluff and go right ahead and pursue the matter.

 

Many years ago, I was in a similar position, I received a dismissal letter out of the blue, accusing me of theft for using the works phone. It stated that as long as I didn't pursue the matter they wouldn't take it any further, but were I to take legal action against them then they'd report me to the police for theft.

I showed it to a friend of mine who worked for the CPS, and he said straight away that the very fact that they'd made such a conditional threat would entirely compromise the legitimacy of any complaint.

 

They can't hold an allegation of criminal action like a joker to play when it suits them. As you say, it's blackmail.

When did the incident occur, or when did they discover it had occured? If they haven't reported it yet, they're knackered.

Link to post
Share on other sites

honeybee firstly,

they wouldnt do the manager for more,as they covered up his story!

 

elpulpo,

they donot agree on "established practice"as my son was lead to believe,they have just twisted the practices to suit there needs.

 

no-one ever reported the piece of ply as missing,but did question my son on a door that went missing over the same weekend.

the fact the site was left open anyone could have taken it from the fri-sun.

my son informed them "he didnt no anything about a door ,but openly admitted on giving away the piece of ply,as he though he was doing no wrong".

Link to post
Share on other sites

honeybee,you right.

he did pay for it on the monday.

 

however at the meeting on thursday they asked my son,

"why didnt you pay for it,seems as though it was you who took it"

 

in hindsight,he prob should of,but then again why wasnt he advised to do that when firstly unofficially asked about the door.

 

because they wanted to "close pandora,s box" as such and make him a scape goat for everboby else!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Laingy, I think it's Don't Get Mad, Get Even time.

 

You saw a lawyer before, and BRB gave you some links to other legal help. I agree with Elpulpo, it's time to see a specialist. If the company write some or all of this down, a lawyer could have a field day. They will probably also have experience of companies threatening the police and have insight into theft and other legal issues.

 

A lawyer will be far enough removed from this not to be intimidated, they're used to this kind of threat.

 

Go for it. x

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

you could be right.

 

We all just feel really wreary of it all now.

 

could we stand going through another 3-6months of this and to be told we got 50-50 chance.

 

the word "police" rageing its ugly head is so intimidating.

 

going to have to sleep on this i think.

 

think my son,just now wants to draw a line under it and try and get on with his life.

 

forgot to say,thay have agreed to say the reason of them parting company they are prepared to change to "mutual agreement".

 

now cos the felt a bit sorry for him,are they doing that as a favour to maybe help him career wise or cos they no we got a case.?

 

its just mind games.

 

head wrecking !

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

forgot to say,thay have agreed to say the reason of them parting company they are prepared to change to "mutual agreement".

 

now cos the felt a bit sorry for him,are they doing that as a favour to maybe help him career wise or cos they no we got a case.?

This lot are commiting legal suicide!

 

On the one hand they're threatening him with the police, yet they're offering to state the reason for his leaving as 'mutual agreement'?!

 

They know damn well he's got a case against them.

 

Ask for a reference.

Once you've got 'mutual agreement' in writing, you're on dry land.

Link to post
Share on other sites

elpulpo does that not mean though once we have signed that we agree

case closed in effect.

 

they are loooking into a reference, they said.

 

Ah. Definitely don't sign anything with them saying that you settle the matter by agreeing to the reference, or anything else.

 

Just try and get a reference from them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is looking very like what happened to me as stated in post #59.

I received a letter saying,

"We're dismissing you with immediate effect for Gross Misconduct/Theft.

Don't even think about taking it to Tribunal or we'll have the police on ya.

But hey, no hard feelings mate, we still want ya to play squash for the club, and if ya need a reference that's no problem".

Doesn't add up, does it?

That's because the real reason for my dismissal was that they wanted to give my job to someone else, and when they'd offered me 2 months wages to quit, I'd said no.

 

The employer here offering to state the reason for departure as 'mutual agreement' completely undermines the validity of the dismissal.

If they felt he was genuinely guilty of theft, there's no way they'd offer that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys, just tuned back in. I wonder if the employer means a compromise agreement, or just a reference. Laingy, I think this could be gold dust.

 

When you feel less worn out by it all and maybe you've heard from these idiots, see what's on offer and if you want to pursue it or not. I agree with Elpulpo, to threaten the police and then offer to write about mutual agreement doesn't stack up.

 

Please let us know next time you hear something, or with any other questions you come up with.

 

My best.

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...