Jump to content
  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I thought so, I managed to get hold of ACAS and have put in a claim.    thank you 
    • I assume your holidays run from March to April or something similar. As far as i know your holidays continue to accrue - covid or not, especially since you kept working they have no leg to stand on.
    • Thank you so much for the replies already!   Just to add to the original post , I no longer live at the address that they've send the letter to (have changed my address with DvLa) not sure if it makes a difference    For a windscreen ticket  1 The date of infringement? 11th February 2017   2 Have you yet appealed to the parking company yet? Yes. I dont have any evidence of it as it was from 3 years ago. I sent photos of the car park and my parking ticket . I still have the paid parking ticket    has there been a response? No.      have you received a Notice To Keeper? (NTK) [must be received by you between 29-56 days] I can't recall this. But I believe I may have    When I received debt collectors letters , I then sent the offer to pay letters and the PDA   5 Who is the parking company? One parking solution    6. where exactly [Carpark name and town] did you park? Vantage point , brighton  08-13-2020-11.24.33.pdf offer to pay - pcn.pdf pda.pdf
    • ok, bit more info i should have stated. The claim was started within the 6 years stat limitation. the hearing was after 6 years had expired and so was the strike out. It is now 8 years past default notice, and i have not heard anything since strike out for 1.5 years. surely another claim for the same terminated account is timebarred, even if they change the amount to a lesser amount.   the issue is the oc bank has written to me stating i am due a refund of wrongly taken charges and interest FROM 2011 and have applied the refund to the os balance, which is with the purchaser company who was struck out. The oc say they have informed the purchaser of the revised balance, which means the claim against me by the purchaser was for the wrong balance. surely this does not mean thy could use this balance for a new claim 8 years later? this smells like a trick.
    • 2020-08-13 13.52.49.pdf 2020-08-13 13.52.49.pdf 2020-08-13 13.53.05-1.pdf 2020-08-13 13.53.05-1.pdf
  • Our picks

    • Curry’s cancelled my order but took the money anyway. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/423055-curry%E2%80%99s-cancelled-my-order-but-took-the-money-anyway/
      • 11 replies
    • Father passed away - Ardent Credit Services (Vodafone) now claiming he owes money. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/423040-father-passed-away-ardent-credit-services-vodafone-now-claiming-he-owes-money/
      • 9 replies
    • Currys Refuse Refund F/Freezer 5day old. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422656-currys-refuse-refund-ffreezer-5day-old/
      • 6 replies
    • Hi,  
      I was in Sainsbury’s today and did scan and shop.
      I arrived in after a busy day at work and immediately got distracted by the clothes.
       
      I put a few things in my trolley and then did a shop.
      I paid and was about to get into my car when the security guard stopped me and asked me to come back in.
       
      I did and they took me upstairs.
      I was mortified and said I forgot to scan the clothes and a conditioner, 5 items.
      I know its unacceptable but I was distracted and Initially hadn’t really planned to use scan and shop.
       
      No excuse.
      I offered to pay for the goods but the manager said it was too late.
      He looked at the CCTV and because I didn’t try to scan the items he was phoning the police.
       
      The cost of the items was about £40.
      I was crying at this point and told them I was a nurse, just coming from work and I could get struck off.
       
      They rang the police anyway and they came and issued me with a community resolution notice, which goes off my record in a year.
      I feel terrible. I have to declare this to my employer and NMC.
       
      They kept me in a room on my own with 4 staff and have banned me from all stores.
      The police said if I didn’t do the community order I would go to court and they would refer me to the PPS.
       
      I’m so stressed,
      can u appeal this or should I just accept it?
       
      Thanks for reading 
      • 16 replies
style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2943 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

This is a bit of a long shot, but I wonder if anyone knows the answer.

 

ET case for constructive dismissal won without question. It was never about the money, more proving a multi-million £ company should still play by the rules. At the time of the case, I wasn't aware that I had to put together the financial details of what I was claiming - thinking the Court would make an award on what they thought.

 

In the end, I claimed loss of earnings up to the date of the hearing, which wasn't a huge amount (petty cash to the company involved), and although the ET recommended I claim for future loss of earnings, as I was then self employed, and obviously hoped there wouldn't be, I declined to do so.

 

Now I really wish I had, as due to the recession, the business lost a considerable amount of money to start off with.

 

I know it's a long shot, but is it possible to have the claim re-opened and re-assessed?

 

I'm reasonably sure it's not - but there's no harm in asking?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry - it's not possible.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am a barrister specialising in employment law, and only represent employees. My advice on employment issues is advice - not legal opinion - and is based only on the facts you provide. If you want an accurate assessment of your case and prospects, you should get legal opinion from a lawyer - not a public forum. Anything I tell you is for guidance only, and is based on my experience of the law in the context of what details you provide.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for responding. I didn't think it would be, but it was worth asking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a bit stuck on this one, so could do with some advice.

 

Business has transferred ownership twice in the last 6 months, so shall call them employer 1, 2 and 3.

 

I'm employer 1.

 

One of the employees I transferred was pregnant and her SMP started approximately 4 weeks after the first transfer.

 

Employer 2 didn't really want to take on my staff, indeed dismissing both, although came unstuck and compensated one, and forced the other to start her SMP a little earlier.

 

Employer 2 claimed the SMP from HMRC in a lump, 'up front' and has been paying the SMP accordingly.

 

Now business has transferred again. Employer 3 is making no attempt to contact employee and the business is currently closed, although employee has written to 'introduce' herself. Employer 2 says that he has passed over the remaining SMP due to employer 3, although there is only his word on this (and, I'm disappointed to say, little trust in him).

 

Although I'm sure that employer 3 would normally be liable for any remaining SMP, given that employer 2 received the monies 'up front', I'm not sure if there is any liability there or not.

 

Can anyone advise please?

 

Many thanks for your help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the employee was TUPED over then the new employer would have to pay any remaining SMP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If the employee was TUPED over then the new employer would have to pay any remaining SMP

Thank you for responding. I know that normally that would be the case, but the transferring employer has already received the SMP from HMRC, in advance. Given that the monies have been paid to him, I'm just not sure if the liability (at least in HMRC's opinion) remains with him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm helping a former employee of mine bring a claim for unfair dismissal against the new operator of the business, under the TUPE legislation. ET have accepted the case and set a date for hearing.

 

Out of the blue, the respondent's solicitor has written directly to her, requesting her to withdraw the claim, and i she doesn't, they will make an application for the case to be struck out.

 

Having read the relevant rule that the letter refers to, I am of the opinion that the letter is a bit of 'scare tactics' in as much as "we know what we're talking about, you don't, and you haven't a hope of winning, so call it off now" sort of thing. Is this a normal tactic by a solicitor?

 

Secondly, although only my opinion, I think it's inappropriate for the solicitor to be writing directly to her with such a letter, and believe they should only write through the tribunal?

 

Can anyone help please?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It may well be a scare tactic. It is a silly letter to write but there is nothing against a solicitor writing the letter to the other side. I would keep the letter to show to the tribunal.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your quick reply. Documents being relied upon are to be submitted in 2 weeks time. Should a copy of this letter be included, or is it not relevant?

 

Should we respond to the letter or just ignore it? They have given a deadline for the application to be withdrawn, 'or else' they will apply for the matter to be struck out under Rule 18(7)(b)?

 

I don't believe the matter will fail, but I guess like anything, nothing in life is certain.

 

For future reference (as this whole business is upsetting) can it be requested that all correspondence is made through the ET?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

For future reference (as this whole business is upsetting) can it be requested that all correspondence is made through the ET?

 

Unfortunately not. Correspondence is usually a must with litigation and the Tribunal wouldn't want bogging down with petty correspondence!

 

On what basis are they proposing to try to strike the claim out? I presume little prospects of success?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for responding becky. They have stated the reason as being "no chance of winning". But surely that is exactly why the case is going to hearing, for THEM to decide who will win.

 

It's a slightly complex case, and they are claiming that as the business was closed at time of transfer, TUPE doesn't apply. But the business was only closed on compassionate grounds and only for 3-4 weeks. I could give more info, but I don't want to put too much on a public board that would identify the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mmm, that's true, but there are some claims brought which have no chance of winning and should never have been brought in the first place, which is why the ET has the power to strike some out.

 

It sounds as though this case should be allowed to proceed to a full hearing, though - TUPE is too complex an issue to be determined without a hearing, I think. It is indeed a common scare tactic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is too. My friend doesn't have legal representation and they know that. They've also highlighted the £500 fees deposit the ET can ask for, again, I think to try and scare.

 

Do you think we should respond to the letter?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see why she should! If they make a formal application to the ET though, clearly she should reply at that stage!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, thank you Becky. We shall ignore it but respond to the ET if they do make an application.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm helping someone with an ET claim in relation to a TUPE situation.

 

The respondents solicitor has applied for the case to be struck out on 2 points;

Failure to exchange documents within the timeframe, and

The case has no reasonable chance of success

 

There was confusion on the exchange of docs and they were sent to the ET within the timeframe, as it wasn't clear they were to be sent direct to the other side. They were sent to the other side as soon as the mistake was realised with an explanation and an apology.

 

Surely the whole point of a tribunal is for them to decide who is right and wrong?

 

What happens with this application to strike out? Can the ET just agree to strike out or do they have to write and ask for any explanations?

 

Thanks for your help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The solicitor for the respondent will always ask for it to be struck out, no matter how good your grounds are, its their jobs to limit the respondents liability. If the ET want an explanation, they will ask for one. I wouldn't worry about it too much, there really is nothing you can do until they ask the question, but it would be worth having a statement drafted explaining your position.


I am not a legal professional or adviser, I am however a Law Student and very well versed areas of Employment Law. Anything I write here is purely from my own experiences! If I help, then click the star to add to my reputation :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you ibruk. I can't see the point of requesting it to be struck out purely because surely the whole point on going to a tribunal is because the 2 sides can't agree! But the late exchange of docs did happen :-s

 

TBH I'm amazed that the employers solicitor hasn't advised them to accept responsibility, with the evidence we have in docs (and in theirs too) it would be virtually impossible to say 'a relevant transfer' hasn't happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Until the tribunal date is set, they will try to get it struck out. The solicitor may have advised that, but the respondent doesn't want too, and therefore the solicitor is just doing what they can.


I am not a legal professional or adviser, I am however a Law Student and very well versed areas of Employment Law. Anything I write here is purely from my own experiences! If I help, then click the star to add to my reputation :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, thank you. Am currently preparing a letter to the ET stating why it shouldn't be struck out. Haven't a clue what to put at the moment, but hopefully I will gain inspiration as I type! ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good evening.

 

Without boring you with all the details, can someone point me in the right direction to a possible unfair redundancy issue. i.e. The job isn't 'redundant' but the owner of the business wants his daughter to work instead of the employee (he's intimating that the daughter is 'helping him out').

 

I've a feeling that I've read something that implies this would be an 'unfair' redundancy, but I need to know what legislation to read and research, that would confirm that.

 

Can anyone advise please?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You won't find anything that specific, but general redundancy principles would still apply...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Positions are made redundant, not people, which is usually an academic differentiation but not here.

 

If the job is still there you cannot just be let go.

 

The question is, what can you do about it? Worst case he claims economic downturn and downsizing, pays you off, then claims an upturn six months hence, hires offspring, and there's not a damn thing you can do.

 

How would you evidence the work was still there?

 

The directgov site is usually quite good for explaining employment law in simple terms.


Never assume anyone on the internet is who they say they are. Only rely on advice from insured professionals you have paid for!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you both. It's a complex situation, and part of an ongoing ET case, involving TUPE. The business owner is denying liability for the employee anyway. But has mentioned that, in any event, if a TUPE occured, the employee would have been made redundant immediately, as he doesn't 'employ' anyone. But, I'm pretty certain that the daughter is paid (difficult to prove though) and is doing the same job, hence my question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good afternoon.

 

I have recently acted as a lay representative at an ET on behalf of a friend of mine. In short, we produced records of personal conversations, which proved the employer was 'being economical with the truth'.

 

The employer, has taken the bundle of documents and is show showing them to any tom, dick or harry, which is having repercussions on both myself and myfriend, for 'betraying confidentiality'.

 

Obviously, had the employer not lied in the first place, none of the personal documents would have needed to be revealed, but alas, others can't see that.

 

My question is, quite simply, should the documents remain confidential to the ET, or is it absolutely fine for them to be shown around?

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...