Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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
      • 162 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

Ssp


suziebear67
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4408 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

Oh I thought they had to

http://www.businesslink.gov.uk/bdotg/action/ruDetail?itemId=1081443357&type=REGUPDATE

 

but if she goes on long term SSP and they will not pay her SSP and she can get this confirmed,

then she can claim I.S. If she fits the criteria, eg single, capital under 16k

she will not get paid the first three days of her illness,

Link to post
Share on other sites

Qualifying conditions

 

An employee must meet all the following conditions to get SSP:

  • They must be your employee - and they'll need to have done some work under their employment contract before going off sick.
  • The days they're off sick must make up part of a 'period of incapacity for work' (PIW) - explained below.
  • The days they're getting SSP for must be qualifying days - these are days they normally work.
  • Their earnings must be at least as much as the Lower Earnings Limit for National Insurance contributions (NICs). This is £107 a week for 2012-13.
  • They can't have already received the maximum amount of SSP for the PIW - or for a series of linked PIWs (28 weeks).
  • They must have notified you about their sickness - either within your own time limit or within seven days.
  • They must give you evidence of their incapacity, if you require it.

In practice most employees who are absent from work because they're sick qualify for SSP. Part-time, casual and temporary employees can also get SSP as long as they meet the qualifying conditions.

An agency worker is entitled to SSP from the first day of their contract provided they satisfy all the other conditions for entitlement. However, they must have undertaken some work under that contract to become entitled.

You can read about how to work out if an employee earns enough to get SSP in the E14, 'Employer Helpbook for Statutory Sick Pay'. This also includes information on employees who are specifically excluded from the SSP scheme.

 

I found this link on the HMRC website so as long as your daughter has a contract of employment then yes she is entitled to SSP but if there is no contract then it will be ESA that she needs to claim

Link to post
Share on other sites

If entitled to SSP but not paid full amount then I.S for top up

but if not entitled to SSP for any reason then its states ESA.

news to me :)

 

 

If you have no underlying entitlement to SSP, or if your occupational sick pay ends before 28 weeks you are not entitled to SSP, your employer must complete form SSP1 for you to claim Employment Support Allowance (ESA).

 

 

Edited by MIKEY DABODEE
Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for replies she has decided to look for another job and try to continue with the other one it was a stress related problem at work but after speaking to managers they are going to try and deal with it

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...