Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • its not about the migrants .. Barrister Helena Kennedy warns that the Conservatives will use their victory over Rwanda to dismantle the law that protects our human rights here in the UK.   Angela Rayner made fun of Rishi Sunak’s height in a fiery exchange at Prime Minister’s Questions, which prompted Joe Murphy to ask: just how low will Labour go? .. well .. not as low as sunak 
    • From #38 where you wrote the following, all in the 3rd person so we don't know which party is you. When you sy it was your family home, was that before or after? " A FH split to create 2 Leasehold adjoining houses (terrace) FH remains under original ownership and 1 Leasehold house sold on 100y+ lease. . Freeholder resides in the other Leasehold house. The property was originally resided in as one house by Freeholder"
    • The property was our family home.  A fixed low rate btl/ development loan was given (last century!). It was derelict. Did it up/ was rented out for a while.  Then moved in/out over the years (mostly around school)  It was a mix of rental and family home. The ad-hoc rents covered the loan amply.  Nowadays  banks don't allow such a mix.  (I have written this before.) Problems started when the lease was extended and needed to re-mortgage to cover the expense.  Wanted another btl.  Got a tenant in situ. Was located elsewhere (work). A broker found a btl lender, they reneged.  Broker didn't find another btl loan.  The tenant was paying enough to cover the proposed annual btl mortgage in 4 months. The broker gave up trying to find another.  I ended up on a bridge and this disastrous path.  (I have raised previous issues about the broker) Not sure what you mean by 'split'.  The property was always leasehold with a separate freeholder  The freeholder eventually sold the fh to another entity by private agreement (the trust) but it's always been separate.  That's quite normal.  One can't merge titles - unless lease runs out/ is forfeited and new one is not created/ granted. The bridge lender had a special condition in loan offer - their own lawyer had to check title first.  Check that lease wasn't onerous and there was nothing that would affect good saleability.  The lawyer (that got sacked for dishonesty) signed off the loan on the basis the lease and title was good and clean.  The same law firm then tried to complain the lease clauses were onerous and the lease too short, even though the loan was to cover a 90y lease extension!! 
    • Northmonk forget what I said about your Notice to Hirer being the best I have seen . Though it  still may be  it is not good enough to comply with PoFA. Before looking at the NTH, we can look at the original Notice to Keeper. That is not compliant. First the period of parking as sated on their PCN is not actually the period of parking but a misstatement  since it is only the arrival and departure times of your vehicle. The parking period  is exactly that -ie the time youwere actually parked in a parking spot.  If you have to drive around to find a place to park the act of driving means that you couldn't have been parked at the same time. Likewise when you left the parking place and drove to the exit that could not be describes as parking either. So the first fail is  failing to specify the parking period. Section9 [2][a] In S9[2][f] the Act states  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN fails to mention the words in parentheses despite Section 9 [2]starting by saying "The notice must—..." As the Notice to Keeper fails to comply with the Act,  it follows that the Notice to Hirer cannot be pursued as they couldn't get the NTH compliant. Even if the the NTH was adjudged  as not  being affected by the non compliance of the NTK, the Notice to Hirer is itself not compliant with the Act. Once again the PCN fails to get the parking period correct. That alone is enough to have the claim dismissed as the PCN fails to comply with PoFA. Second S14 [5] states " (5)The notice to Hirer must— (a)inform the hirer that by virtue of this paragraph any unpaid parking charges (being parking charges specified in the notice to keeper) may be recovered from the hirer; ON their NTH , NPE claim "The driver of the above vehicle is liable ........" when the driver is not liable at all, only the hirer is liable. The driver and the hirer may be different people, but with a NTH, only the hirer is liable so to demand the driver pay the charge  fails to comply with PoFA and so the NPE claim must fail. I seem to remember that you have confirmed you received a copy of the original PCN sent to  the Hire company plus copies of the contract you have with the Hire company and the agreement that you are responsible for breaches of the Law etc. If not then you can add those fails too.
  • 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

My Employer Wants To Do A Credit Check-Can I Get Sacked?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4901 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

 

Can anyone help me please?

 

My employer (a large electronics corporation) have told all the staff that they are going to CRB and Credit Check on everyone to evaluate the potential risk of fraud.

 

I have no criminal record but my credit file is a complete mess and will show a lot of debt.

 

I have worked there 12 years.

 

I dont handle money in my job I work in a call centre taking sales orders etc.

 

Will I get sacked on the spot?

 

Any advice greatly appreciated

 

Honeyot

 

xxxx

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure this is the correct advice, but they - your employers - would need to have written consent to carry out credit check. Have a look at your Contract of Employment and see if this is covered at all. If not, I am sure they would need to vary everyones' Contract to cover this. I am sure you will not be the only person to be worried by this.

 

Hopefully others will be along with more help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Harrased Senior

 

Yes, we have all had to sign a consent form to the checks so its all been done above aboard.

I guess I'm looking for advice on how to respond should they say " youve got loads of debt therefore you are a risk to the company therefore your fired"

 

xxx

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having a bad credit record does not make you a risk – the days of debtors’ prisons are long gone. Do you have a union or trade body you can talk to?

 

In financial services, a credit check is often a part of the selection process and candidates have to agree to it first.

 

If your employer is going to say you are a risk because you have a poor credit record, they will be on extremely dodgy ground if they use that information to alter your working conditions in any way, or if they try to dispense with your services.

 

Does your job involve the handling of cash, the awarding of contracts or purchasing?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Donkey B

 

i work in a call centre processing telephone orders for the electrical component industry. I dont handle cash or award contracts or anything like that. the closest I come to money would be if a customer phoned up and placed an order with a credit card rather than account.

 

I think the company are saying that if you are in debt then you are more likey to try commit a fraud to the company. Thats why they have decided to credit and CRB everyone

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, that is nonsense and would be a slander. People have problems with credit often through no fault of their own. To imply this makes them unreliable or dishonest is plain wrong. Has nobody stood up to them? It’s a pretty gross invasion of your privacy, because I can’t see how police and credit checks can be used on such a sweeping basis. Maybe you should tip off the press...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Donkey B

 

I think the company are saying that if you are in debt then you are more likey to try commit a fraud to the company. Thats why they have decided to credit and CRB everyone

 

I wouldn't say so. It seems to me, from your original post, that they're doing a credit check in regards to money laundering and fraud. If they were doing just a credit check then I would be concerned, but as they're doing a CRB too I'd say they're covering their arses for their insurers.

 

Also, have there been any changes in the last 90 days, such as a new MD/Sales Director or a different company take over?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Postjgg is doing a degree on employment law maybe worth pming him to look in.

 

This company can not sack you for being in debt - nor can they take disciplinary action - if they do you must use their apeal process - if you ended up taking this to tribunal - you would wipe the floor with them. Big payout.

 

A lot of employers now do credit checks because the CRA's have convinced them that people in debt are risks to the business.

 

My anwser to this has always been if they are dishonest they will rip you off regardless of the credit status.

 

I worked in retail for over 20 years and can tell you that the majority of staff we caught stealing - or defrauding the company never had poor credit histories.

 

There are very few offences that would stay on a crb check for 6 years - so unless you have been to prison or had a suspended sentence then a default on your credit file is considered worse.

 

This is realy begining to grate with me - i applied for a job at the RAC - no cash handling - nor order taking - just directing recovery vehicles to breakdowns - and had to have a credit check - told them they must be joking and to eff off.

 

Housing is also going this way - Rent a house - credit Check

New Job - Credit Check

Benefit Claim - Credit checks

 

So what they are saying now is if you have bad debts - you MUST pay them off even if you cant afford them due to your circumsatnces - or you get

 

No House

No Job

Benefits Cut.

 

Being in debt is now being worse than a criminal - now thats what i call debt slavery. No freedom work for the creditors (Mainly the banks)

 

Just remove the word debt. and you are now nearer the mark

 

OOOH it makes me so angry.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have witnessed someone working in financial services having their temporary contract terminated because of a CCJ showing up on a credit record. But this would not have happened if it were just defaults.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

DoH - I had one of those days yesterday, long story, not for this forum otherwise would let you all in - lets just say imagine a 64 year old senior citizen, disabled, 2 hearing aids, and a walking frame being escorted from an o2 shopfencing.gif

 

That's finished my day at work with a bliddy great smile h s

Hope all's well

R

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] I asked them to wait whilst I got my Bank card :violin:

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

 

Information that may help if a CCA request is refused due to the lack of a signature . . http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?248863-Signature-demands-fight-back-possible-!&highlight=

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be very supprised it they would even be allowed do a CRB check, CRB checks are only for people who work with vulnerable adults or children. Other than that most aatempts to look into any iffy past are covered by the rehabilitation of offenders act. I moved into a new estate where there where loads of kids and the housing association where not allowed to run a check. AFAIK you cannot sign any rights under the rehabilitation of offenders away. As to the other forcing you to sign to give permision to access your credit file would give you leave to sue for contructive dismisal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting topic, I know a chap who was asked to sign a consent form for a credit check after a few years employment and he politely refused due to the fact that he had a number of disputes and felt that the information would be incorrect anyway. There were no repercussions on him.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They can do standard CRB checks which will give information on unspent convictions - these should be done prior to employment starting or during the probation period.

 

Those for people in education/health/care etc are the enhanced versions that can hold details from when you have not been charged and convictions that may have been spent under normal circumstances.

 

Dont forget also that the period for convictions to become spent is generaly a lot less than the informaion held on CRA files.

 

The reason being to give the opportunity for the individual to be to prove their rehabilitation.

 

It now makes more sense to steal the money from an employer and to pay your debts - than have the debt. because the period the issue will be held on file is less for the criminal act

 

Madness.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as you continue to do your job well, why would they want to sack you? There are strict guidelines over redundancies and all sorts of things need to be taken into consideration. As you do not handle money I can't see why they'd be interested - what fraud could you commit? As for the CRB check I wouldn't have thought anyone would agree to that as it's absolutely irrelevant to your jobs and to whether or not you're likely to commit fraud. CRB is in two forms, normal and enhanced. As a headteacher and later a taxi driver I went through the enhanced CRB - it's nothing to worry about unless you've been prosecuted for offences with children.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have witnessed someone working in financial services having their temporary contract terminated because of a CCJ showing up on a credit record. But this would not have happened if it were just defaults.

 

I was informed by a prospective employer that i would have to explain -AND PROVE - that i was dealing with any defaults or delinquest accounts.

 

Strange thing is i have recentley been aproached by a recruitment agencey asking if i would be interested in a job in loss prevention - And no credit checks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be very supprised it they would even be allowed do a CRB check, CRB checks are only for people who work with vulnerable adults or children. Other than that most aatempts to look into any iffy past are covered by the rehabilitation of offenders act. I moved into a new estate where there where loads of kids and the housing association where not allowed to run a check. AFAIK you cannot sign any rights under the rehabilitation of offenders away. As to the other forcing you to sign to give permision to access your credit file would give you leave to sue for contructive dismisal.

 

Not quite right count o

The full CRB check is for people wishing to work with children and vulnerable adults but I work in the Security Industry and every three years when my SIA licence is renewed I have a CRB check for past offences, I receive a copy of the report

In general companies seem to be tightening their procedures and in this case I really don't think there's anything to worry about but a call to the CAB or ACAS would help to ease doubts

Good luck

R

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] I asked them to wait whilst I got my Bank card :violin:

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

 

Information that may help if a CCA request is refused due to the lack of a signature . . http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?248863-Signature-demands-fight-back-possible-!&highlight=

Link to post
Share on other sites

According to Experian:

the employer can usually only look at publicly available information, says James Jones of Experian.

 

This includes the electoral roll, county court judgments, bankruptcy and individual voluntary arrangements which are legally enforceable deals struck with your creditors to repay them some of your debt over a fixed period. But if the firm shares credit history data with credit reference agencies and if the job is sensitive, they can look at your full credit report, with your consent.

 

Elsa x

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...