Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They have defended the claim by saying that the job was of unsatisfactory standard and they had to call another carpenter to remedy. My husband has text messages about them losing the keys a second time and also an email. What do they hope to achieve??? Most importantly,  as far as I have seen online, now I need to wait for paperwork from the court, correct?
    • The Notice to Hirer does not comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule  4 . This is before I ask if Europarks have sent you a copy of the PCN they sent to Arval along with a copy of the hire agreement et. if they haven't done that either you are totally in the clear and have nothing to worry about and nothing to pay. The PCN they have sent you is supposed to be paid by you according to the Act within 21 days. The chucklebuts have stated 28 days which is the time that motorists have to pay. Such a basic and simple thing . The Act came out in 2012 and still they cannot get it right which is very good news for you. Sadly there is no point in telling them- they won't accept it because they lose their chance to make any money out of you. they are hoping that by writing to you demanding money plus sending in their  unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors that you might be so frightened as to pay them money so that you can sleep at night. Don't be surprised if some of their letters are done in coloured crayons-that's the sort of  level of people you will be dealing with. Makes great bedding for the rabbits though. Euro tend not to be that litigious but while you can safely ignore the debt collectors just keep an eye out for a possible Letter of Claim. They are pretty rare but musn't be ignored. Let us know so that you can send a suitably snotty letter to them showing that you are not afraid of them and are happy to go to Court as you like winning.  
    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the 02/01/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the 19/05/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, 02/06/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
  • 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

Maternity discrimination?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4799 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

Honey - It had my name on it as though it was a letter address to me. I assumed it was for me as a result. What was in it was the pooling criteria and scores for the managers redundancy pool, at least that is what he said it was, he didnt actually show me. I dont know why it was addressed to me. I didnt look in it - I wish I had now!!

Papa - ever the optomist I always try and think the best of people!! I have just emailed the insurers again to see if they have a decision and expressed how urgent it is.

Elpupo - they didnt give me anything I was just marched out of the building with a vague promise someone would be in touch.

Papa - He refused to look anywhere himself, he refused to search my bag, my drawers, he was just adamant it was there somewhere, he asked 'if i had put it in my bag by mistake' i denied it as I hadnt, knowingly. he got my co worker to verify that it had come from my bag, he didnt show either of us what was in it, look of triumph he took off, came back , made her witness taking my keys and seeing me out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 117
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Having possession of the crown jewels in an unopened box which is addressed to you, is quite honestly, of little evidencial value. had you actually opened it and read the contents and then placed it in your bag that might have been a different issue. As it is, write down exactly what he did and didn't do, note the time you had off since the date when all this was relevant. The fact that he himself thought that a "mistake" had occurred and then he took the action he did seems well over the top and indicative that he had a plan of action. You don't march people out of a building in the humiliating manner that he did for 'mistakes.'

Link to post
Share on other sites

Y'see I'm one of these people who has zero admin skills, I leave everything to build up and then file 2 years worth in an afternoon, I didnt look at it, if I had I would have given it back. The other question is i'm doing the et1 at the moment - do I put this in, and how.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mum I would wait until SarEl or one of the other lawyers come and advise you. From my perspective I would mention it as an act of Victimisation as it clearly was intended to humiliate you, punish you and call your integrity and honesty into disrepute.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The ET 1 can be quite brief outlines generally where the case is. Employed x years in role of y. Problems with health ccc Hours were reduced because nnn Went on maternity leave xx came back zz new manager in post not allowed back to pre problem hours... Did not get fair shake in allocation of points re redundacy because dddd Allege sex discrimination, allege unfair dismissal allege (all the things SarEl advised earlier. Grievance lodged date fff Date returned to work after week away to clear desk letter incident happened..... clearly letter planted in desk to punish re lodging grievance led out of building clear act of victimisation

 

 

These are like Headlines. You don't have to detail exact facts just a general direction where you are going.

 

Sorry for mild hilarity above.... we see a lot of posts here and a certain familiarity is met with the regulars, it doesn't detract from what we try and do for OP's....... you are going to need humour to get to the end of this process Mum.... just try and stay the course. You are either one of two types of people the one that will give up and just move on and not think the fight worth the hassle or the other which is to be outraged that you have been treated this way by your ex employer and want to take it all the way. My wife and I were the second type but there was many times when we thought of giving up but decided not to. You have your own path to tread and we will try and help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I can stay the distance,my sense of humour just seems to have disappeared down the loo for the minute. I just feel utterly humiliated, lost and my head is about to explode with sheer disbelief and panic. No phone calls tonight, no emails, ET1 half done, will post up again in the morning for some guidance.

:evil:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Mum, hope you're feeling a bit better this morning. You have no reason to feel humiliated, you didn't do anything wrong. Try to move on with the rest of your life now. At least you don't have to go back and face the office now.

 

HB x

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello again. I'm really sorry about the tablets. I know how it feels to manage to get off them and you hope not to re-start, but as you say, if you need them you need them.

 

I'm sure 9th March will come around very quickly. Try to unwind a bit and spend some quality time with your baby.

 

HB x

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mum... I know that doctors always want to help and it is difficult for them NOT to prescribe a medication where they think that it will help, and indeed some people do need that prop, but I would ask you, do YOU really think it will help your situation? Personally I need tablets to ward off pain but I hate it as the side effects are hard to deal with, so as going on the meds will affect not only you but your baby (and there is no more satisfying and relaxing bond is there not of breast feeding, not that I have done it of course) I would ask you is it worth it for a short term fix? Don't do it if you can at all help it and cope without it.

 

The Grievance hearing will no doubt be heard once you have submitted your ET1. The grievance result and appeal result will only confirm the decisions that have already been made (By the way I would further grieve about your treatment yesterday) therefore the resultant letter will be an act of victimisation. These things just start to pile up after a while. The point I am trying to make is you should NOT worry about what actions they do to you as YOU HAVE NO COTROL over that. You can only retreive monetary gain from winning at the ET. You can control the life of your new baby and difficult as it is you have to put the work aspect of this on the back burner and merely fight the injustice. This could go on for months if not years (ours took nearly 4 years from start to finish and aspects are still ongoing). So think again about meds!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

ET1 submission : is this working or is it too long winded / too much information? Do I need to say how this made me feel as well? The impact? I believe I was unfairly dismissed through unfair selection for redundancy.

I believe I have been treated less favourably than someone who had not been on maternity leave and so discriminated against.

 

Background

I became pregnant in August 2009 and advised my employer when I found out a few weeks later. I advised my line manager, the companies Director X, in November 09 I wanted to stop travelling to our office in B given the considerable stress this was causing and the potential impact this stress would have on the pregnancy. This journey from Torbay was often done at short notice , resulted in a 12 hour day, four of which would be spent in the car and whilst I was contracted to work 25 hours a week this journey resulted in TOIL of over 60 hours being accrued. I was told this was not possible and had to send my employer details from the Health and Safety Executive as to the company's obligations to conduct a pregnancy risk assessment. This was conducted and the risk in travelling accepted. As a result my hours were reduced from 25 to 20. I was offered no alternative employment to make up the hours I had lost in removing me from this risk and my pay was reduced.

 

I went onto maternity leave early at the end of February 2010 due to raised blood pressure. It was agreed a member of staff, X , would be upgraded to cover my maternity period. All tasks including the work in Barnstaple were included in this role.

 

My baby was born in May 2010.

 

I met with X about my return to work on 19th November 2010. He clearly stated he could not increase my hours but gave no reason as to why this was. He also stated that I did not want to go back to working in Barnstaple but again gave no reason why or canvassed for my opinion. He then quickly informed me that the company would be entering into a formal redundancy process and I was required to attend a meeting on December 13th where this would be discussed in more detail. He was clear all jobs were at risk. I asked him what I could do to help in terms of fundraising and was told not to worry. This conversation was witnessed by my partner.

 

I returned to work on January 4th to find that X remained in post working the hours that I could not be given back despite all staff and all contracts that I had managed before going onto maternity leave still being in place. As I used to manage X in her caseworker role before my maternity leave, this supervisory role had been taken by X and again this was not returned to me. I was given no explanation and no alternative employment at the terms and conditions I left were offered. Instead I signed a letter that stated I agreed to the changes in my terms and conditions. I was not given the opportunity to seek advice, but after my initial induction meeting was told to sign it as the Admin Officer had a copy ready for me.

 

The redundancy was conducted through a pooling process. I was assessed in the Managers pool of two people, me and my colleague Y who has the same role as me. Niether X or X were part of that pool. Based on scoring I was deemed to be the lowest and have been made redundant. X as my assessor had used incidents that allegedly had occurred whilst I was on maternity leave that I knew nothing about and could not defend myself against as part of the assessment. X however has not been made redundant. She continues to do the job I was doing prior to my maternity leave with X continuing to pick up her supervision yet X was assessed in the Caseworker pool and X in the Directors pool. During confidential scoring interviews X stated to me that X had done very well in the caseworker pool but had she been assessed in the managers pool she would not have done very well at all due to her inexperience.I challenged why she was still doing my role and was told she wasnt. I asked why her email still said 'caseworker manager' and he said it was only for a short period.

 

I have now raised these issues as a grievance with my employer. I believe as a result of this I have been potentially victimised. (I dont know how really to put this bit)

xx

Edited by mumisskint
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...