Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks for that. Should I still apply for a time order or just continue to make payments as normal?
    • Autocorrect typo. For “ admission instructive settlement" read "administrative settlement"
    • No such thing as bailiffs in the north anymore. HMRC have certain statutory powers, but obviously, they don't apply here. The legislation is much like the rest of the UK: MB either chases the debt themselves or sells it (or a %age) to a DCA. The DCA has no more rights than the original creditor had. They have to apply for a collection judgment against you through the Enforcement of Judgements Office. Hence @lolerz blunt point that
    • This is the full appeal & response :    You reported that you were the registered keeper but is not prepared to state who was driving at the time the parking charge was issued. You reported that you are being held liable for the parking charge.         You completed the appeal on 09/02/2023 18:19:20. Upon arriving at the shopping centre The driver attempted to park in the disabled bay, which at the time was encroached by another vehicle already parked well outside of their bay, not displaying a badge. Due to the nature of the visit, the driver was required to park promptly and exit the vehicle, whilst displaying the blue disabled badge. Upon appealing, apparently the only thing that matters in this case is the sign post stating the parking bays must be adhered to at all times. Without any recognition for the fact the driver was physically not able to park elsewhere & correctly displayed their blue parking badge     The operator made their Prima Facie Case on 16/02/2023 15:02:06.   The Operator Reported That... The appellant was the driver. The appellant was the keeper. The operator is seeking keeper liability in accordance with PoFA.. ANPR/CCTV was used. The Notice to Keeper was sent on 15/12/2022. A response was received from the Notice to Keeper. The ticket was issued on 09/12/2022. The Notice to Keeper (ANPR) was sent in accordance with PoFA. The charge is based in Contract.   The Operator Made The Following Comments... The vehicle was not parked fully within the confines of a marked parking bay whilst parked in one of the carpark that we manage. Signage displayed throughout the site states "Vehicles to be parked within the confines of a marked parking bay". As the vehicle was in breach of the terms and conditions that are stated on the contractual signage throughout the site, a Parking Charge was issued.  As stated in the NGP initial appeal:  Arrived on site with a disabled passenger & as is visible in photo, we were unable to park in the disabled bay due to the other vehicle in the photo encroaching the disabled bay, meaning my passenger could not physically get out of the vehicle if we had parked between the marked lines. Please see photo for proof of blue badge & photo of parking on the day. Blue badge was displayed whilst parked.  >> We would just like to clarify that upon receiving their appeal, we reviewed the CCTV footage from the date in question and at no point did a passenger leave the vehicle nor is the keeper mentioning these facts to this IAS appeal.  We note that during the appeal process that we were provided with a disabled badge, but not the full badge showing whose badge this belongs to. Nevertheless the driver failed to correctly park within confines of the bay.  However for the IAS adjudicators viewing only we have attached a file titled "PCN 400786" This file shows the events that occurred with the driver on this date.  Please see file titled "Malpas Road Shopping Park" which shows what the signage looks like onsite.  Please see the file titled "Vehicle Location" which shows where the vehicle was parked and where the signage was located near by.         I am satisfied that the Appellant was parked in an area where the Operator has authority to issue Parking Charge Notices and to take the necessary steps to enforce them. A number of images, including a site map have been provided to me by the Operator which shows the signage displayed on this site. After viewing those images I am satisfied that the signage is sufficient to have brought to the attention of the Appellant the terms and conditions that apply to parking on this site.  The signage at this site makes it clear that parking is on private land and that vehicles must be parked wholly within the confines of a marked parking bay and that a failure to comply with that term and condition will result in the issuing of a Parking Charge Notice. I can see from the photographs provided that the Appellant was not parked within the confines of a marked bay, which the Appellant accepts. Whilst I appreciate the circumstances raised by the Appellant, mitigating/extenuating circumstances cannot be taken into account. Simply by parking outside of a marked bay the Appellant breached the displayed terms and conditions and as such I am satisfied that the PCN was correctly issued on this occasion. I have considered all the issues raised by both parties in this Appeal and I am satisfied that the Operator has established that the Parking Charge Notice was properly issued in accordance with the law and therefore this Appeal is dismissed.  Currently appealed 400786 Issued on 09/12/2022 by New Generation Parking Management Ltd to vehicle registration Originally rejected by operator on 02/02/2023
  • 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
      • 160 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

TUPE, Can't increase holiday entitlement


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5108 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

Hi All

 

I have a client who moved from one company to another under TUPE.

 

She has just found out that she could get more days holiday if she was on the new company contract.

 

She asked if it was possible to sign a new company contract and was advised this is no longer possible. (been about 3 years since the move)

 

She has also been told she is on the OLD contract and that any increase in holiday entitlement is now frozen. (Had she stayed at old company she would now have 24 days holiday but she is frozen on 22 days with no chance of this EVER going up)

 

Does anyone have any advise on whether this is allowed and what actions my client is able to take.

 

It's in the banking sector

Thanks

Darren

Link to post
Share on other sites

We need a bit more info,

 

I am assuming that 22 days is exclusive of Bank Holidays - yes?

 

Does your client work Full Time ?

 

If not how many hours per day over how many days per week.

 

Beau

Please note: I am not a lawyer and as such any advice I give is purely from a laymans point of view;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

Client works 5 days a week from 9am - 1pm.

 

Holidays are 22 days to take when she likes plus Bank Hols. (if she works these she can take double pay or day in lieu)

 

If she has stayed in old company her holiday entitlement would have gone up after 5 years service from 22 days to 24 days. She moved over to new company but stayed on the old contract (didn't sign new one with new employer).

 

Now she is told can't sign new contract and that her holiday entitlement is frozen forever.

 

If need more info please let me know and thanks for your help

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the face of it, this could be descriminatory.

 

The Regulations have the effect that:

puce.gif Employees employed by the previous employer when the undertaking changes hands automatically become employees of the new employer on the same terms and conditions. It is as if their contracts of employment had originally been made with the new employer. Thus employees’ continuity of employment is preserved, as are their terms and conditions of employment under their contracts of employment (except for certain occupational pension rights).

 

But I would first look to the current Terms & Conditions of Employment.

 

Was there any variation of terms implemented at the time of the TUPE.

 

I am leaning towards the fact that if the other employees have received an increase in entitlement in the last 3 years (Other than Statutory Rights) then this could be viewed as discriminating against the TUPE'd employee.

 

If your client has been told that there will be no more entitlement EVER, that could also be deemed as descriminatory (does she have this in writing)?

 

Does she do the same job as someone who was not TUPE'd and already receives more holiday entitlement.

 

Beau

Please note: I am not a lawyer and as such any advice I give is purely from a laymans point of view;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Other workers have not had an increase during her time there other than under the terms based on length of service.

 

Staff working in the new company with same length of service doing same role should have 25 days holiday (after 5 years service).

 

She has been advised by HR that she cannot sign a new contract (which was offered during the actual original transfer) and must remain on her old contract.

 

At no point was she advised there was a time limit on signing nor the fact her TUPE holiday entitlement would be frozen. (at 22 days)

 

The challenge of looking at current T&C of employment is she doesn't know whether to look at old, new or a variation of both company policies. (she doesn't have a copy of the contract to hand and HR are not helping her)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Client works 5 days a week from 9am - 1pm.

 

Holidays are 22 days to take when she likes plus Bank Hols. (if she works these she can take double pay or day in lieu)

 

The statutory minimum paid holiday entitlement is 5.6 weeks.

So, even if she worked all 8 bank holidays and was paid double time for them she would still be entitled to a minimum of 28 days paid holiday.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Other workers have not had an increase during her time there other than under the terms based on length of service.

 

Staff working in the new company with same length of service doing same role should have 25 days holiday (after 5 years service).

 

She has been advised by HR that she cannot sign a new contract (which was offered during the actual original transfer) and must remain on her old contract.

 

At no point was she advised there was a time limit on signing nor the fact her TUPE holiday entitlement would be frozen. (at 22 days)

 

The challenge of looking at current T&C of employment is she doesn't know whether to look at old, new or a variation of both company policies. (she doesn't have a copy of the contract to hand and HR are not helping her)

 

So is her length of continuous service 5 years yet?

 

Custom & Practice would come into play regarding the signing of the new contract - in other words it has been accepted by the Employer because that is what the employee has been doing for a considerable length of time. So the fact that a new contract has not been signed in my view is immaterial.

 

What I am trying to establish is the if there is a case where the TUPE'd employee is suffering compared to the un-TUPE'd employee.

 

That is where you would have grounds for a grievance. The fact that she would be better off with her old company would not come into play in this instance.

 

Beau

Please note: I am not a lawyer and as such any advice I give is purely from a laymans point of view;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

She started work in old company in 2002, TUPE'd to new company in Dec 2006 and has worked for new company since then (under her old contract).

 

What she can't understand, aside from the holiday issue, is why she can't sign a contract NOW when she was able to a few years back...(who'd have thought law would be so complex hey :))

Link to post
Share on other sites

She started work in old company in 2002, TUPE'd to new company in Dec 2006 and has worked for new company since then (under her old contract).

 

What she can't understand, aside from the holiday issue, is why she can't sign a contract NOW when she was able to a few years back...(who'd have thought law would be so complex hey :))

 

Ok so she has more than 7 years continuous employment so would qualify by right to be paid the same entitlement as the non TUPE'd employees.

 

This is grounds for the grievance - she should be treated the same as all other employees in the company doing the same job with similar lengths of service.

 

Now, in the grievance letter she could also state and ask for her current T&Cs and see what they say- you never know the employer may even realise the error of their ways.

 

Beau

Please note: I am not a lawyer and as such any advice I give is purely from a laymans point of view;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...