Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I googled "prescribed disability" to see where it is defined for the purposes of S.92. I found HMRC's definition, which included deafness. I don't  think anyone is saying deaf people cant drive, though! digging deeper,  Is it that “prescribed disability” (for the purposes of S.88 and S.92) is defined at: The Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) Regulations 1999 WWW.LEGISLATION.GOV.UK These Regulations consolidate with amendments the Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) Regulations 1996...   ….. and sleep apnoea / increased daytime sleepiness is NOT included there directly as a condition but only becomes prescribed under “liability to sudden attacks of disabling giddiness or fainting” (but falling asleep isn't fainting!), so it isn’t defined there as a “prescribed disability”  Yet, under S.92(2)(b) RTA 1988 “ any other disability likely to cause the driving of a vehicle by him in pursuance of a licence to be a source of danger to the public" So (IMHO) sleep apnea / daytime sleepiness MIGHT be a prescribed disability, but only if it causes likelihood of "driving being a source of danger to the public" : which is where meeting / not meeting the medical standard of fitness to drive comes into play?  
    • You can counter a Judges's question on why you didn't respond by pointing out that any company that charges you with stopping at a zebra crossing is likely to be of a criminal mentality and so unlikely to cancel the PCN plus you didn't want to give away any knowledge you had at that time that could allow them to counteract your claim if it went to Court. There are many ways in which you can see off their stupid claim-you will see them in other threads  where our members have been caught by Met at other airports as well as Bristol.  Time and again they take motorists to Court for "NO Stopping" apparently completely forgetting that the have lost doing that because no stopping is prohibitory and cannot form a contract. Yet they keep on issuing PCNs because so many people just pay up . Crazy . You can see what chuckleheads they are when you read their Claim form which is pursuing you as the driver or the keeper. they don't seem to understand that on airport land because of the Bye laws, the keeper is never liable.   
    • The video-sharing app told the BBC that a "very limited" number of accounts had been compromised.View the full article
    • The King is the second monarch to appear on Bank of England notes which will be fed gradually into the system.View the full article
    • The King is the second monarch to appear on Bank of England notes which will be fed gradually into the system.View the full article
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4264 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

evening all !

i am new to this forum lark so please bare with me !

i am a mechanical supervisor (plumbing foreman)

i have been employed with my current company for nine years ! last year july 2011 after consultations i was given a finishing date of 31st of july , this date was extended twice by a month taking me though to september 2011 , then i was moved to another site

since my leaving date i have had no formal communication regarding my position within the company ! so im my world i have been *at risk* for over 15 months ! and could be given notice at any time !

i was offered what i consider was a very poor redundancy package , and rejected that in favour of getting my union rep and lodging an appeal, which i and my union rep listed my grievances, which were noted but never responded to by the company

 

my question is should i keep my head down and carry on working in this manner or do i force the issue with the company and get it resolved ? , im my world, the longer i leave the situation as it is, i could have a better and bigger claim ??

looking forward to hearing peoples thoughts and suggestions

many thanks plumbuk

Link to post
Share on other sites

thank you for responding

 

ideally i would like to be made redundant, and take them to a tribunial for keeping me *at risk* for so long(stress worry) plus i have a long list of grievances i would like to hit them with

Link to post
Share on other sites

resubmit your grievances in writing with the support of your rep

 

write and ask if you are still formally at risk

 

the longest I was at risk for was 18 months. It was my choice not to leave and find another job earlier. I didn't get a bigger payout!

Never assume anyone on the internet is who they say they are. Only rely on advice from insured professionals you have paid for!

Link to post
Share on other sites

has it had an actual impact on your health that has caused you loss? I'm guessing not as you are not signed off with stress. It's not fun, but not everything not fun can be sued for. You have also contributed to the situation by letting it run on so long, and not job seeking elsewhere (as far as you have said)

Never assume anyone on the internet is who they say they are. Only rely on advice from insured professionals you have paid for!

Link to post
Share on other sites

well no im not signed off sick , but its has been a constant worry since the redundancy date has elapsed , as for contributed to the situation , im not entily sure i can see that , surely responsability lies with the employer ??as they created the situation ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

They created it, you stayed in it by choice (an inaction IS a choice), and you have no actual financial loss to sue for. If you aren't claiming a mental health disability caused by them I am not sure what you are claiming.

 

As ever you are free to ask a no win no fee solicitor for a second opinion :)

Never assume anyone on the internet is who they say they are. Only rely on advice from insured professionals you have paid for!

Link to post
Share on other sites

thank you for your prompt responses :-) yes i have issues with the way i feel i have been treated ! in my world their lack of doing things right is wrong

,so if i had have taken time off due to stress i would be in a better position to make a claim ? not that im going to take time off for that now! as its done now ! and as for inaction is a choice . a choice made by myself to keep the peace ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, you'd need the stress to be far more debiltating than just a few weeks off for stress. How about following my suggestion of writing to them and asking them to clarify your position of being at risk or not?

Never assume anyone on the internet is who they say they are. Only rely on advice from insured professionals you have paid for!

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes i will communicate with the company regarding the at risk bit ! as my union rep advised the same thing , just thought i would see what peoples thoughts about what i was thinking

thanks for taking time out to respond :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...