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

Benefits and SSP


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4232 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

Something that's been worrying me for a while... I work limited hours because of ill health. I'm coping at the moment but I have one day contracted and do one or two (at the moment two) extra days which I claim for as extras. One of them is due to a colleague cuttng her hours, the one that's temporary is due to another colleague leaving. (That job will soon be advertised but as a four day job). If I'm off sick I only get paid for the contracted day.

 

About two years ago I was very ill and that illness lasted a month. Financially I was okay during the month as I claim for the extra hours at the end of each month so when I became sick at the end of February, I had just claimed for work done in February for which I was paid on 26th March. However when my pay came in the next month it was just SSP for the one day a week done during late Feb/March and at the time that totalled £293. I imediately put in a claim online for benefits as I barely had enough to pay rent and a few bills. I was clled back and told to claim ESA which I did. A few days later I was called and asked whether I got Statutory Sick Pay. I told them that I did but explained the amount and the contract v overtime situation but was told that if I got SSP I wasn't entitled to ESA or any other benefit.

 

This is worrying me as that particular condition could come back (it has once although luckily not as severely) and my health condition fluctuates. I daren't be off sick if I have to live on so little. It would be a bit more now but still wouldn't give me anything to live on.

 

Was I properly advised? Could I have claimed anything? I can't bethe only person on a varied contract who would not get enough SSP to live on but getting SSP rules out benefits?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was on CT benefit at the time but only got £20 a month even at the point when I needed it. I was still paying about £50 per month. I didn't claim HB and didn't change the benefit at the time. I'm now claiming neither and as I work in the office that administers those claims I don't want to have to if I can avoid it. The benefit really isn't designed for a fluctuating income and I was submitting pay slips constantly to show how my income changed. I gave up in the end. Too much hassle for too little gain and then my work moved into the same office where claims are made and I didn't want my colleagues to know my problems.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So was the SSP rate for a full week divided by five, and you were paid for one day? If this is so, then your employer is confused and has worked out the SSP wrong.

We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office ~ Aesop

Link to post
Share on other sites

The SSP is based I think on 7 hours x 4.5 days per month. It fitted back then with what I'd have got if I did no extra days. In those days I might do full time for two weeks ad then no extra days for a while. It's more regular now. I don't dispute the amount I was paid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The SSP is based I think on 7 hours x 4.5 days per month. It fitted back then with what I'd have got if I did no extra days. In those days I might do full time for two weeks ad then no extra days for a while. It's more regular now. I don't dispute the amount I was paid.

 

There isn't a variable amount of weekly SSP, you either get it or you don't. You have to earn at least a lower limit in earnings for the eight weeks prior to being off sick (in 2012 the lower limit is £107 a week, not sure what it was 2 years ago) If your earnings total for the eight weeks divided by eight is equal to or more than the lower earnings limit, then you were entitled to the full rate of SSP for the period you were off sick (one month would have been 342.98). If you did not earn the average of the lower earnings limit per week, then you are not entitled to SSP AT ALL, but would be entitled to ESA - your employer would have to complete an SSP1 form which you hand in with your ESA claim and you will be awarded ESA cont based if you've paid enough contributions or income based if your income is low enough.

 

If your employer was paying you company sick pay, but you were under the limit for SSP, then you could also have claimed ESA, you just needed an SSP1.

We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office ~ Aesop

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...