Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Afternoon all Looking for advice before I defend claim for car tax payment that the DVLA claim I owe £68 from an idemity claimback from my bank and unpaid tax  So brief outline. Purchased car Jan 30th ,garage paid the tax for me after I gave them my card details so first payment £68 out in Feb 24  followed by payment of £31 from March due to end Jan 24 Checked one of my vehicle apps and about 7-10 days later car showing as untaxed? No reason why but it looks like DVLA cancelled it ,this could be because I did not have the V5 and the gargae paid on my behalf but not sure did not receive a letter to say car was untaxed.  Fair enough I set up the tax again staight away in Feb 24  and first payment out Mar 31st , and each payment since has come out each month for £31 , this will end Feb/Mar 2025 so slightly longer than the original tax set up so all good. I then claimed the £68 back from my bank as an indemity refund as obviously I had paid but DVLA had cancelled therefore it was a payment for nothing?  Last week recieved a SJP form dated 29th May stating that DVLA were claiming for unpaid tax and a false indemity claimback which of course is the £68. It also stated that I had received two previous letters offering me the oppotunity to pay that £68 but as I had not responded it was now a court claim that I must admit guilt for or defend. My post is held for weeks at a time from Royal Mail ( keepsafe) due to me receiving hospital tretament at weeks at a time that said I did not receive any previous letters from DVLA. So I am happy to defend this and go to court but wondering what CAG members think? In summary I paid an initial amount of £68 and then a DD of £31 , tax cancelled so I set up a new DD at £31 a month all in the month of Feb 2024, I claimed the £68 back from my bank. DD has been coming out each month without issue and I have paperwork to show the breakdown for both DD setup's plus bank statements showing the payments coming out . The second DD set up has extended payments up to Feb/Mar 2025. DVLA claiming the £68 was ilegally claimed back despite the fact they cancelled the original DD for reasons unknown. Is this defendable ? I will post up documents including the original DD conformations 
    • That doesn't look like clacton ... Former Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage buys coastal home in Lydd-on-Sea WWW.KENTONLINE.CO.UK Former Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage bought a coastal home in the county, it has been reported.  
    • It's not a private road.  It's a small public street (with Resi houses) that leads into and from public road/ highway. The garages have land in front of the doors.  Then there's a yellow line. So there's a clear marker on what is private and what is public.  These people keep parking on the private land side
    • Do you also own land the garages on and the private road? Or is it shared freehold with right of access to all freeholders or why?  Dx  
    • I may try cheap plastic bollards (traffic cones) first just to see if they get moved.  I will look into the cost of fixed bollards.
  • 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

Secret audits


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4717 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

I hope someone with employment knowledge can help me with some legislation.I work for a bus company who use passengers as "secret auditors", to check on the bus drivers to see if they greet the passengers, give them eye contact, give them their ticket and change in their hand, give them a smooth ride, and say goodbye ( or similar) on leaving the bus.The driver is then secretly scored accordingly and the audit is handed into the bus company for the Operation Manageresses perusal.If there are any areas of concern, then the driver is asked into the office to discuss any issues.However, I found out from a long standing employee today that the audits are illegal under the Data Protection Act 1998,as the audits should not be given to anyone else.Further more, it was alleged by the same driver that the European Human rights act applies as well if the secret auditing causes harm, or concern to the driver(s) concerned.Can anyone confirm if these laws do apply to these so called illegal audits? If so, can you give me the link to the necessary section in the relevant laws.Many thanks in advance

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello again.

 

Is this something along the lines of mystery shoppers please? I didn't think that was illegal, although your case could be more complicated.

 

What does your union think? I believe you have one if I remember your previous posts.

 

My best, HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

But what do you care?

 

Because you always,

'greet the passengers, give them eye contact, give them their ticket and change in their hand, give them a smooth ride, and say goodbye ( or similar) on leaving the bus'.

 

Right?

 

It's a myth that bus drivers are a shower of utterly miserable people with zero people skills and no capacity for even basic customer service.

 

Isn't it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The company needs to maintain Customer Service Standards. Your the public face of the company, how else can they check that you represent them in a favourable manner consistently. It is a good thing. It does keep people on their toes, it improves standards. If the management really wanted to go overboard,

once the report comes through and if it's good then maybe some M & S vouchers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would respectfully suggest that your long-standing colleague has been misinformed....

 

Looking firstly at the Data Protection Act, providing that you aware of the employer's use of anonymous auditing to assess performance and the purposes for which such data will be used, then there is no breach. You have agreed, through acceptance of your contract of employment and it's associated T&Cs for data recorded in this way to be passed between the company appointed to gather it, and the employer, for the specific purpose of performance appraisal.

 

Article 8 of the Human Rights Act, gives protection from unwarranted intrusion into private and family life, home and correspondence, however this applies only to Government or a Public Authority, so the first point would be whether your employer (the bus company) is either of these? If not, then you cannot use the HRA as the basis of any complaint. Even where this is the case, and the employer is a Public Authority, then providing that the monitoring is not excessive or overly intrusive, and you are aware of it's use and the purpose for it, then there will be no breach.

 

You do of course have the right under the DPA to request sight of data held in relation to you in a relevant filing system (such as a personnel file) in the event of a complaint about information being incorrect or malicious, but from what you have said, there is no issue with the use of such monitoring in itself.

Any advice given is done so on the assumption that recipients will also take professional advice where appropriate.

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

DONATE HERE

 

If I have been helpful in any way - please feel free to click on the STAR to the left!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

its only potentially a breach of Human rights, Article 8 your right to privacy, if your employer is a public body subject to meeting 3 things which Ii talk about below. Even if they are a public body they may be able to justify breaching your human right to privacy. To do this, they need to show that

(1) their act was lawful- what does your employment contract and possible policies and procedures say?

(2) that the secret audits serve one of the listed legitimate objectives listed under the law maybe public safety possibly in your case and,

(3) that they way they are going about with their secret audit is a necessary proportionate way of meeting whatever their aim was with having the secret audits in the first place.

 

It's not therefore clear that the secret audits are in fact illegal or as I would like to say unlawful, unless there is nothing in your contract work policies, handbook, or any other law that allows them to do this. If there is nothing the only possible argument you could say is that it is a breach of your employment contract, breach of an implied term of trust and confidence.

 

 

As for breach of data protection, it depends on how the information is gathered and whether or not the information contains personal data: there are complex legal test to decide if information is classed as personal data. You could find out more on the Information Commissioners website.

 

Hope that helps...

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...