Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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

Contractual dispute regarding length of notice period.


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4275 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,

 

A bit of a long post below so apologies! Please do bear with me!

 

Basically, I think my employer might be trying to get out of giving me my full contractual notice entitlement, however I am not sure. The bottom line is, I think if am entitled to something, then they should be fair and pay it.

 

I think I could be entitled to 2 months payment in lieu of notice rather than a week’s payment in lieu of notice based on the following:

 

- My initial employment offer letter stated that my probation period was 3 months long and that the required notice in regard to termination of employment was 2 months, after the probation period expired. During the probation period the required notice was one week. (Please see picture LINK: http://tinyurl.com/termnotice-A ).

 

- Page 12 of the principal terms and conditions of my employment dispute this ( please see LINK: http://tinyurl.com/termnotice-P12 ), saying that confirmation of employment from the HR director is necessary for the 2 months notice period to apply, but on page 2 of my principal terms and conditions it says the offer letter prevails in a dispute between the offer letter and the terms ( http://tinyurl.com/termnotice-P2 ).

 

- My probation was extended to roughly 6 months ending on 5 July 2012. The letter at B below ( http://tinyurl.com/termnotice-B ) says that during this period (not after) notice period on employment termination remains at one week.

 

- My employment was terminated on 11 July 2012, after the extended probation period had ended. I think it was due to be terminated on the 6 July 2012 but was delayed.

 

Per the initial offer letter ( http://tinyurl.com/termnotice-A ) which states that after the initial probation period the applicable notice period is 2 months, I think the notice my employer should have given me, in regard to the termination of my contract would be 2 months, and that I should get 2 months notice pay, as my termination was after the extended probation period had ended.

 

What do you think? Relevant document images are included as links below.

 

It’s a long post thanks so much for reading and your time, any help is very much appreciated! Am pulling my hair out here!

 

 

 

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Links / Appendices:

 

A: Extract from my initial offer letter detailing notice periods. Employment began on 9-Jan 2012.

LINK: http://tinyurl.com/termnotice-A

 

B: Letter extending probation period to 5-July of this year.

LINK: http://tinyurl.com/termnotice-B

My employment was terminated on 11-July, after the probation period had ended. It was due to be terminated on the 6-July but was delayed.

 

C: Please find below links to images of the terms and conditions of my employment. (The first linked page states that offer letter will prevail in the event there is a discrepancy between it and the terms and conditions).

 

Further image links:

 

LINK: http://tinyurl.com/termnotice-P2

LINK: http://tinyurl.com/termnotice-P3

LINK: http://tinyurl.com/termnotice-P4

LINK: http://tinyurl.com/termnotice-P5

LINK: http://tinyurl.com/termnotice-P6

LINK: http://tinyurl.com/termnotice-P7

LINK: http://tinyurl.com/termnotice-P8

LINK: http://tinyurl.com/termnotice-P9

LINK: http://tinyurl.com/termnotice-P10

 

T+C’s page 10 says notice only 2m after confirmation, however I would dispute this based on offer letter, which says notice changes without mentioning any confirmations required. T+C’s state offer letter prevails over T+C’s in a dispute.

 

LINK: http://tinyurl.com/termnotice-P11

LINK: http://tinyurl.com/termnotice-P12

LINK: http://tinyurl.com/termnotice-P13

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys

 

Thanks for your advice honeybee13, calling Acas is very high up on my to do list.

 

Hi assisted blonde, I was provided with a revised date from the original meeting date, I just went. I'm not sure if they were up to something!

 

Many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Poplin,

 

I have been to an ET and won for someone on this exact point. The case is Przybylska v Modus Telecom Limited

 

I have not read your links yet, but do come back, if what you say in the OP about what your contractual documents state you could be on a winner, no length of service needed easy, easy, breach of contract claim.

 

Che

...................................................................... [FONT=Comic Sans MS]Please post on a thread before sending a PM. My opinion's are not expressed as agent or representative of The Consumer Action Group. Always seek professional advice from a qualified legal adviser before acting. If I have helped you please feel free to click on the black star.[/FONT] [FONT=Comic Sans MS] I am sorry that work means I don't get into the Employment Forum as often as I would like these days, but nonetheless I'll try to pop in when I can.[/FONT] [FONT=Arial Black][FONT=Comic Sans MS][COLOR=Red]'Venceremos' :wink:[/COLOR][/FONT][/FONT]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

T+C’s state offer letter prevails over T+C’s in a dispute.

 

No, not so sure about that, this clause (21.2) seems to say that in the event of dispute re contents of employee handbook and SMT or offer letter, either offer letter OR SMT will prevail ........ no??

 

But I still like your claim more than theirs. There seems to be conflict between the offer letter, the extend probation letter, and the SMT, and the common law principle of contra proferentem gives you a massive advantage in this area.

 

How many people do they employ?

 

Che

Edited by elche

...................................................................... [FONT=Comic Sans MS]Please post on a thread before sending a PM. My opinion's are not expressed as agent or representative of The Consumer Action Group. Always seek professional advice from a qualified legal adviser before acting. If I have helped you please feel free to click on the black star.[/FONT] [FONT=Comic Sans MS] I am sorry that work means I don't get into the Employment Forum as often as I would like these days, but nonetheless I'll try to pop in when I can.[/FONT] [FONT=Arial Black][FONT=Comic Sans MS][COLOR=Red]'Venceremos' :wink:[/COLOR][/FONT][/FONT]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi elche, thanks so much for responding!

 

Che, I would have thought 21.2 would only kick in if there was a dispute between the handbook and SMT and then, the offer letter or SMT would prevail over the Handbook. I guess I will need to get a copy of the handbook if I can, just to see what it says!

 

Hmm, I am not sure how many this firm employ in total, but in my department there were about 20 people.

 

Che Thankyou! Further comments very much appreciated!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Che, I would have thought 21.2 would only kick in if there was a dispute between the handbook and SMT and then, the offer letter or SMT would prevail over the Handbook. I guess I will need to get a copy of the handbook if I can, just to see what it says!

 

I think you should ask for a copy of the employee handbook, but I was merely pointing out how I read 21.2. You cannot be bound by clauses in the handbook if you were never given it, and in any event it would appear for your claim the relevant documents are the offer letter, the extend probation letter and the T & C's (contract of employment), and as you have pointed out the offer letter and extend probation letter say nothing about having to have the probation confirmed.

 

Can I ask, when this happened, and the chronology i.e. what date were you given the T & C's?

 

Che

...................................................................... [FONT=Comic Sans MS]Please post on a thread before sending a PM. My opinion's are not expressed as agent or representative of The Consumer Action Group. Always seek professional advice from a qualified legal adviser before acting. If I have helped you please feel free to click on the black star.[/FONT] [FONT=Comic Sans MS] I am sorry that work means I don't get into the Employment Forum as often as I would like these days, but nonetheless I'll try to pop in when I can.[/FONT] [FONT=Arial Black][FONT=Comic Sans MS][COLOR=Red]'Venceremos' :wink:[/COLOR][/FONT][/FONT]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Che (oh and hi all)

 

Here’s a rough but pretty accurate Chronology:

 

Offer letter - Dec 2011

Job start - Jan 2012

Extension of probation - April 2012

Delivery of SMT - May 2012

Termination - July 2012 (For minor pointless reasons, some reasons given were inaccurate as well! Another breach of contract?)

 

Che, what are you thinking?

 

Many thanks and very kindest regards,

Link to post
Share on other sites

Che, what are you thinking?

 

There is one small difference between your case and the previous case I dealt with on this point.

 

In the prior case the respondent was trying to argue that there was an implied contractual term that the employee had to have the probation period actually confirmed.

 

In your case there is an express contractual term in the SMT regarding this, and this was the last contractual document given so potentially they could argue that once the SMT was issued as this was the last document given it overrides any prior contractual terms.

 

I shall give this more thought, and come back as I am busy right now.

 

Did you sign the SMT or was it just sent to you?

 

Che

...................................................................... [FONT=Comic Sans MS]Please post on a thread before sending a PM. My opinion's are not expressed as agent or representative of The Consumer Action Group. Always seek professional advice from a qualified legal adviser before acting. If I have helped you please feel free to click on the black star.[/FONT] [FONT=Comic Sans MS] I am sorry that work means I don't get into the Employment Forum as often as I would like these days, but nonetheless I'll try to pop in when I can.[/FONT] [FONT=Arial Black][FONT=Comic Sans MS][COLOR=Red]'Venceremos' :wink:[/COLOR][/FONT][/FONT]

Link to post
Share on other sites

But I also note that the SMT does clearly state where there is any dispute regarding terms the offer letter shall prevail (page 2).

 

Hmmmmm................ food for thought....

...................................................................... [FONT=Comic Sans MS]Please post on a thread before sending a PM. My opinion's are not expressed as agent or representative of The Consumer Action Group. Always seek professional advice from a qualified legal adviser before acting. If I have helped you please feel free to click on the black star.[/FONT] [FONT=Comic Sans MS] I am sorry that work means I don't get into the Employment Forum as often as I would like these days, but nonetheless I'll try to pop in when I can.[/FONT] [FONT=Arial Black][FONT=Comic Sans MS][COLOR=Red]'Venceremos' :wink:[/COLOR][/FONT][/FONT]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah I see where you are coming from, yes I did sign it and I sent it back to them.

 

What you note is definately what I am arguing. The offer letter prevails, and it says after the probation period ends the notice period is two months. My contract was terminated nearly a week after the extended probabtion period ended.

 

Also the letter advising of the extention of the probabtion period says notice is a week *during* the probabtion period.

 

Do you think this + the contra proferentem advantage you mentioned would be enought to argue it sucessfully at tribunal? Especially taking account of point 19.3 in the SMT?

 

Thanks so much for the help Che!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's 50 / 50, with perhaps you ahead.

 

How big are the company, I always love the argument, "And the Respondent, whose company turnover last year was xx million pounds, expects us to believe this was a simple oversight on their part! And with all their resources meaning a vast inequalityof bargaining power when the contracts were negotiated, why should contra proferentem not apply in its strictest sense?"

 

If you see where that would go ......

 

Shame you signed and returned the SMT!

 

What part of the country were you employed in?

 

Che

...................................................................... [FONT=Comic Sans MS]Please post on a thread before sending a PM. My opinion's are not expressed as agent or representative of The Consumer Action Group. Always seek professional advice from a qualified legal adviser before acting. If I have helped you please feel free to click on the black star.[/FONT] [FONT=Comic Sans MS] I am sorry that work means I don't get into the Employment Forum as often as I would like these days, but nonetheless I'll try to pop in when I can.[/FONT] [FONT=Arial Black][FONT=Comic Sans MS][COLOR=Red]'Venceremos' :wink:[/COLOR][/FONT][/FONT]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Che the company is in london where I am. where are you based? hopefully in london too!?

 

The turnover of the company was about £30m. Yes! with all those resources they should be able to do a watertight contract. If they cant be bothered they should feel the full force of the consequences of their laziness. The company is a sneaky company!

 

Thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...