Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Funding concerns are expected to see Saudi Arabia reduce its giant building schemes.View the full article
    • Why the former Fujitsu engineer is such a key figure in the Post Office scandal.View the full article
    • next time dont panic and wet yourself and offer payment !! Date of issue – 14 june 2024 date for aos - 2nd july  date to file defence - 16th july      other than the CCA/CRP and if it ever gets that far..a witness statement, you send them NOTHING and dont ever instigate comms with them. esp by email.. i would be sending one final email in reply to theirs above. PLEASE NOTE: email is NOT to be used for any comms with regard to our mutual court claim. else they'll be sending a whole forest of faked agreements/documents to you one minute before a court deadline removing your shace to object/pull them apart as unenforceable etc. dx        
    • The EU and China still disagree about the import taxes, but have agreed to discuss them further.View the full article
    • Unbelievably I can't find it, I will have a really good look for it when I have a bit more time on my day off this week. AS a side note, I emailed them offering a token payment to settle the account and avoid court action, which unsurprisingly they have declined. However their reply states:  A Claim was accepted on 19 June 2024 which means we cannot set up a payment plan just yet. You should have received a claims pack from the Court. We would ask for this to be completed with your offer of repayment and returned to either ourselves or the Court.  You have 21 days for this to be completed and returned in order to avoid a Judgment by Default. This means we would need to receive this by 10 July 2024. I was under the impression it was 19 days from date on the claim form. which was the 14th, which would be 3rd July. Could I use this against them as it seems like they are giving me false information in the hope of getting a judgement by default?
  • 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

Trade Plate Driver - unauthorised deduction from wages


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4389 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,

 

I work for a trade plate car delivery company as a "self employed" contractor, delivering cars up and down the UK. I have 2 issues. They have made what I feel are unauthorised deductions from my wages. First time was a few weeks ago where they deducted £120 for a new tyre, as I had a puncture. This money was docked without warning. More worryingly, they are now trying to charge me £200 odd for supposed damage to a car I was driving, even though I worked on the job with another driver and he also drove the car part of the way.

 

My question is, are they able to make deductions without giving notice? The contractor agreement states "it is the responsibility of the driver for any transit damage to any vehicle in between collection point and delivery point" and also "if any damage is missed, or any damage is made to the vehicle prior to delivery, you may be held responsible for all costs incurred, unless it is proven to be the fault of a third party". Nowhere on the agreement does it state they will make deductions from wages, just that "you may be held responsible". Surely that is a little ambiguous? Are they able to make deductions without proving you caused the damage? Are you liable by default unless you can prove otherwise? I'm hoping to file a claim in the county court for the money they are withholding. Would this be the correct way to proceed? I'm assuming an employment tribunal would be pointless as I'm not an employee and we're only taking about £500 total. I realise I've asked a lot of questions but any help you can provide would be most appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

The Unlawful Deductions angle cannot really be a consideration due to your self-employed status, as that legislation would only apply in the case of an 'employee', as what you are paid would not be deemed 'wages' but payment for a service.

 

What you are left with is an argument over the terms of the contract which you have to provide a service, and if you have a strong enough case, then this would indeed be a County Court claim. To be honest, the terms that you have stated here look (on the face of it) to be pretty conclusive - the fact that it states that ANY damage in transit is the responsibility of the driver, and ANY damage prior to delivery would lead to you being responsible for costs incurred, however that isn't to say that these are 'fair' terms, and it is that aspect that you need to look at.

 

I think that you need to question whether the contract is sufficiently clear to permit the delivery company to deduct arbitrary amounts with no room for you to question the damage or to verify the actual cost of rectifying any problem - and in the case of there being two drivers, how the liability can be shared.

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

hi sidewinder, thanks so much for the reply.

 

So you do think I may be able to pursue a claim under UCTA as the clause stating you will be responsible for any damage, unless their is evidence the damage was caused by a third party may be unfair? I'm surprised they can charge even though there is no evidence I caused any damage and its just as likely the damage was caused by the other driver.What do you reckon?

 

Also with the tyre, when I had the puncture I called the office to inform them, they paid for somebody to come out and supply a new tyre. I then carried on and completed the job. No mention was made of me being liable for any costs. No invoice was raised. The first time I became aware they had charged me was when I checked my bank account the following week and realised the payment I received was £120 light. Are they supposed to give notice when they plan to make a deduction? If they had informed me I was liable for the costs I may well have decided to abandon the job (as I'm self employed I'm sure I have the right to refuse work?) and therefore avoid the charges. Would I have been able to do that? Or would I be liable as I had already started work on the job, so therefore obliged to complete it?

 

This all seems a bit of a grey area. Any thoughts you have you be appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

I agree with Sidewinder.

 

My concern would be:

 

1. How can a Puncture to a Tyre reasonably be classed a Damage to that vehicle and what is their evidence for this?

2. The other damage claims once again what is their evidence for these claims.

3. What is this companies handover procedure to you revieving that vehicle. (What is there Policy and Procedure for this)

4. What documentation is taken and provided at handover of the vehicle to you then to client. (Ask for copies)

 

 

 

I see not one mention of any actual evidence provided to back up these claims written or especially photographic.

How to Upload Documents/Images on CAG - **INSTRUCTIONS CLICK HERE**

FORUM RULES - Please ensure to read these before posting **FORUM RULES CLICK HERE**

I cannot give any advice by PM - If you provide a link to your Thread then I will be happy to offer advice there.

I advise to the best of my ability, but I am not a qualified professional, benefits lawyer nor Welfare Rights Adviser.

Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...