Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you all for your comments....   What do I do now? do I just ignore them? or is there a letter I can send?
    • Guys/gals,   There's been a misunderstanding and for that I apologise. I didn't answer the initial questions because my appeal was just a couple of days away and didn't want to get bogged down with extraneous things that were not factors. I also - perhaps erroneously - got the impression that the questions were stabs in the dark hence my "if you don't know just say" response. Plus I thought my OP answered the questions however upon re-reading it I can see it may not to non-employees. Finally,  didn't want to make myself identifiable if my employer is reading (hence my redacted OP). I wasn't intending to seem difficult.   Short version: My employee has limitless OT to spare - it just wants to restrict people to WTR limits because that's what the client wants. They're happy for me to work OT once I'm under the 17 week WTR average. My appeal has been delayed from to this week so any help is appreciated.  I am one of the protected characteristics as stated in post #14.   Longer version (including answers to questions/points raised)   Why do you think other employees are able to work paid overtime hours without prior approval from the employers? Because they're not at risk of >48 hours. I am and that's why I've been told that I must have my OT pre-authorised so that I don't >48 hours. They were happy for me to work 60+ hours a week until I did so for 3 months in a row and hit the WTR limit. That's when it came to light that the client we work for states that employees must stick to WTR and my employer appears to not want to upset the client.    Ironically, when I checked their relevant HR page everything was factual in relation to WTR, it just assumed everyone would stay in WTR and didn't mention the right to opt-out. Also, when my employer took up the fight for me with the client and explained that I'd opted out, the client reportedly said they were unaware that employees can opt out.     Have you picked arguments with the company managers previously about any issues?  Are you in a more senior position and thus more expensive?  No to both. It's simply because they don't want me to exceed WTR limitations on working hours. We work on a contract for another company who stipulate their own employees must abide by WTR and therefore we must too. My employer was initially happy for me to log as many hours as I want and only changed their mind when the client pushed back.   They're happy for me to work OT just as long as I stay under the WTR limit of no more than an average of 48 hours across 17 weeks.     The company may be doing it for your welfare - do they think you are stressed, taking too much on? They may not think your output justifies doing so many hours so can refuse. They may want to free up some OT hours so others can do a few. None of these reasons apply and there is limitless OT on offer so it's not a case of wanting to share it around. About 10% of employees do OT and the company would be delighted if it was 100%. They just don't want any one person working >48 hours. Anyone can work any hours they wish outside of their normal schedule as long as they don't breach WTR. So last week we had the situation of my employer desperately begging people to work OT as they had a massive shortfall on hours and were not going to meet their commitments to the client and everyone was eligible except me. As much as they wanted to include me, as much as they would have gleefully accepted my 20 hours of OT, they felt that they couldn't and it was lose-lose for both of us.     In summary I felt it was discriminatory because:   1) The site is open 120+ hours a week and has an open-door policy on OT - the more the better and the company constantly begs for it and falls short of client requirements for number of logged hours.   2) They're initially happy for agents to work as much OT as they want and for months on end. Until you hit the WTR limit - even if opted-out   3) They insist on forcing employees to stay within WTR limitations despite employees opting out and OT being available - in which case employees are being denied not for valid issues (eg: welfare, performance issues, limited OT hours available) but because they just don't want that particular employee working the OT that a) is available and b) ends up being unfulfilled   4) So to me, it's discrimination to admit they need the hours working, they'd be happy for me (an opted-out employee) to work them if I hadn't hit the 17 week WTR average, and are only enforcing WTR because the client wants it 5) As it stands, they'd accept requests from every employee except me to work 4pm to 11pm on Friday. Likewise, they're canvassing every employee (except me).   6) They say my opting-out of WTR doesn't give me a legal right to work >48 hours but that is exactly what it does. If you have not opted out then it is illegal for you to work >48 hours therefore opting-out absolutely gives the legal right to work >48 hours. That doesn't mean a company is obliged to offer OT when it normally wouldn't or to extend it's opening hours to accommodate an employees demands for OT but it does, by default, give the legal right to work >48 hours if they OT is available. And the OT is available at my work.   7) As far as I know I am the only person of my protected characteristic and I am also the only one prevented from working >48 hours. Maybe there's a link, maybe there isn't.    
    • Jamie [email protected]   So @MarcusRashford had to shame the government in to feeding hungry children while Boris was trying to build £150,000 treehouse for a six month old child?        and That actually should say So @MarcusRashfordhad to shame the government in to feeding hungry children while Boris was trying (to get someone else) to pay to build £150,000 treehouse for his six month old child? 
    • The move by the UK, US, Canada and Japan will "strike at the heart of Putin's war machine", the UK PM says.View the full article
    • Isnt that 'continue to apply tarifs in breach of WTO regs? As already mentioned here a couple of pages ago  ,, So just Johnsonite right wing press dog whistling to the rabid sheep and distract from Johnsons many many ongoing misdeeds. ... and look at who and where benefits - it aint the UK taxpayer.     Been re-looking at some stuff - and this warrants a fresh look .. and running yourself in circles trying to make sense of it LOL       .. like how so many remainers thought Corbuncle was a good choice .. (not that there was any choice for remainers)
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Letter from Arrow Global on behalf of Orange then Fredrickson on behalf of AG. Please Help


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4213 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


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



Recommended Posts

I have been sent letters requesting for payment of debt to Orange of £114.23.


I had a contract with them for a number of years and this supposed outstanding debt is for their allegation of me stopping payments during a contract. I cant quite remember but I stopped paying orange between August - September 2006 as my contract a 12 month one had ended and I had started working for a company where a mobile was provided. Orange disputed this and said that my contract was 18 months.


I know that I agreed to a 12 month contract through a third party company that offered me a phone upgrade with the network remaining with Orange. I had a lot of calls and letters from Orange in 2006 and 2007 and argued the above points with them a number of times. Since this time I have heard nothing from them until recently we registered on the electrol role recently and a couple of weeks later it begins again.


The first letter dated 18th Novemeber is a Notice of Assignment and is from Arrow Global who now own the debt and explains that Fredrickson International Ltd are working on their behalf


Second letter dated 26th Novemeber is from Fredrickson International Ltd and all they say is that they have been attempting to contact the named person myself and for the recipient of the letter to contact them.


Third Letter dated 02/12/10 is from FI ltd and states:


1 Immediate payment required

2 That I have failed to pay the balance despite previous repeated requests

3 That their client Arrow Global requires payment in full to avoid further action

4 That I must contact them immediately by phone


Fourth Letter dated 09/12/10 is from FI ltd and states:


1 Letter Before Action

2 Debt must be paid in full to FI within next 7 days otherwise we will take immediate action

3 Should it be necessary to issue proceedings in the County Court further additional costs will be added £65 for court and solicitor fees.

4 If a Judgement or decree remains unsatisfied a bailiff may be instructed to recover

5 A Judgement debt or decree against you would seriously affect your ability to obtain credit in the future.


I would really appreciate peoples help with how to proceed with this matter. I really do not take kindly to being threatened in this manner for money that i do not even owe and something that happened 4 years ago.


Kind Regards


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, the SAR should go to the original creditor, in this case, Orange. You can write to whomever is chasing at present to tell them the Account is in dispute with the OR and all action should cease until such time as it is confirmed that this amount is owed, and to whom.

Every journey begins with a single step :):)


Please note: I have no qualifications in this area - my advice is learned from the wonderful members of this Forum. Thanks to you all for your help.


If you have found my post helpful please leave a short message by clicking the star to the left of my profile - Thank You


The only person entitled to your Personal Finance details is a Judge not a DCA


Move all banking activity to another banking group if you have a dispute - your funds can be used to offset debts within the same group.

Be careful with Banking details (card/account numbers) as these can be used to take unauthorised payments.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How is this for my subject access request I sent to Orange or Everything Everywhere as they are now known.



13th December 2010

Data Controller Officer

Everything Everywhere Ltd

Orange PLC

Hatfield Business Park



AL10 9BW.


Re. Subject Access Request


Dear Sir / Madam,


I am writing to you to ask for a full subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 to be performed under my name for the total time that I was a customer with Orange PLC.


I would like a full description of all personal data held, the purposes for which they are / were processed as well as the disclossees or potential disclossees of any personal data.


I expect all information held by your company to be disclosed including but not limited to emails, archived computerised and manual files and all back up tapes.


I look forward to receiving all data within the time limits set out by the data protection act.


Yours Sincerely

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have sent a letter to Fredrickson stating that this account is in dispute with Orange and that all action should cease until resolved as advised by harassed senior. However I have not forwarded the subject access request to either Fredrickson International or Arrow Global.




Edited by Hackers
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Hackers :-)


Just got your note...

You'd have been better using the template SAR from CAG (link in my blog) to be honest. Amend it to suit. You need to specify more of what you require, eg contract, terms and conditions, all communications, account statements, notice of assignment, recordings of telephone conversations and/or transcripts. You also need to enclose the Statutory £10 fee and send it all by Recorded Delivery - they then have 40 days from receipt to comply.

As above, inform the scavengers that the account is in dispute.


I'll look in again later..



BTW...you can call me Elsa I don't stand on ceremony so you can drop the Undercover bit..:spy:





Please check out my BLOG for the quick guide to debt threats - it has all the info & letter template links you need to get started on your journey of TAKING CONTROL. :roll:


All opinions are my own based on research. I am not legally qualified, if in doubt please consult a legal expert.

Hope this has helped or made you smile. Keep your chin up, you're among friends now! Elsa xxx

Please click the *star* of any CAG member who has helped you .

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Elsa,


I have sent both the letters now recorded delivery. I imagine Orange will come back asking for specific information that I require. I want everything they have really, but if they ask I will copy your letter and enclose the £10 fee which I did read about elsewhere but was not going to pay it unless they brought it up.


Got a lot to learn with this debt fighting. Feels good to have sent those letter's now and almost looking forward to receiving the next demanding letter. This is certainly a shift from the doom and gloom / bury my head in the sand outlook I had before.


So thank you to Elsa, harrased Senior and CAG and I eagerly await the next instalment to arrive through my letter box. They will not get anything from me!




Link to post
Share on other sites


  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...