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
      • 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

Maternity Pay and non-cash benefits


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4280 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

My employer and I appear to have reached deadlock on the issue of maternity pay and non-cash benefits. If anyone can answer the following queries, I would be eternally grateful!

 

1./ Are all salary sacrifice schemes classified as non-cash benefits? I (am not on mat leave until Monday 1st October) currently sacrifice £243 pcm for childcare vouchers and 6% of my salary (approx £122pcm) towards a pension scheme - employer matches this. As I understand, the whole 12% is counted as employer contributions and is classified as a non-cash benefit. I am not able to leave either scheme at will, there has to be either a lifestyle change, or I think I can leave the pension in April each year. Is this correct?

 

2./ Do non-cash benefits have to continue through the whole period of maternity leave, paid and unpaid?

 

3./ I receive some contractural pay (100% for 6 weeks and 50% for the next 12 weeks) - this is, obviously, available to be sacrificed - but my pay must not be reduced below SMP at any time.

 

4./ At no point during my mat leave is there enough contractural pay to cover the entire £365pcm salary sacrifice - does my employer have to make up the difference? For example, my monthly salary liable to Class 1 NI's is £1681.10pcm. This gives me an average weekly earnings of £388, which means in the first 6 weeks my SMP is £349.20 and contractural pay is £38.80. Therefore in October, a month containing 5 Mondays, I would expecting to receive gross pay of £1940 of which £1746 is SMP and £194 is contractural pay. What should happen with the childcare vouchers and pension payments?

 

5./ In the subsequent 12 weeks, my SMP is £135 per week and contractural pay is £59 per week. In a 4 week month this gives £236 of contractural pay and in a 5 week month this would be £295 - again, not enough to cover the £365 sacrifice. Again - I guess they take the entire contractural pay, but what about the extra bit?

 

We are both quoting the HMRC guidlines on this, but interpreting them differently. To complicate things, I was TUPE transferred into this company on 1st July this year, and the new company accepted the old companies maternity policy (which is based on the HMRC guidlines) and again, we are both quoting this and disagreeing.

 

Can anyone shed any light on this matter? A colleague of mine is in the same position, albeit already on maternity leave, and she will run out of time to file an employment tribunal claim on 26th October (3 months - 1 day since she was first paid incorrectly), so we really need to resolve this quickly.

 

They are saying that I cannot expect to be paid more on maternity leave than when I'm at work, but my opinion is that it is a transferring T&C anyway, and the HMRC guildines are that this is what happens and it's unfortunatley generous to the employee under this particular set of circumstances.

 

If I'm wrong, I will happily accept it, but I've read and reread the documents a number of times and I cannot see how they are reaching their interpretation.

 

Help?

 

Liv

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes, that's the document. I've been looking at the "occasional misundertandings" advice bits, specifically the one at the top of p22. And the linked table, section 2.

 

i'm not sure exactly what their argument is, am waiting for their official reply - but seems to be that they don't want to pay the extra during the period of contractural pay, they possibly seem to have accepted it for the bit where I'm on SMP only.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the terms of the salary sacrifice agreement; are 'lifestyle changes' actually defined?

 

i.e. Does it say something along the lines of, 'In the event of lifestyle changes, e.g.redundancy of partner, marriage of employee, pregnancy of employee or partner... etc. either the employer or the employer can change this agreement because of the change in circumstances.'?

 

Or does it just say something like, 'In the event of lifestyle changes this agreement can be amended by the employer.'?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...