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

Will this be an unlawful deduction....?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4220 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

Ok, so the nephew's boss has come up with another cost cutting exercise, only I think he's going to come unstuck this time. (he's known affectionately as the Fat Controller!)

 

He gets upset when employees need to take a days leave at short notice, so he has decided in his wisdom, that anyone taking a day's leave that hasn;t been booked a whole month prior, will not receive pay for the day! So, if you are a parent and have a genuine child emergency, or a carer for a disabled partner, and have to take a day off work, then you won;t get paid for it! Even though you have booked it out of your 28 day a year allowance.

 

To my mind then, if he does this, when he reaches the end of the holiday year, the lads are quite justified to ask for the money for their untaken annual leave.

 

It hasn;t happened yet, its just a proposal, but usually when something goes out for discussiuon it makes no difference what you say or do, its a foregone conclusion.

 

So far he has had to pay out of court settlements for racial discrimination, disability discrimination, and downright bloody unfairness, the lads are getting wise now and watch for unlawful deductions etc. It would be nice to be able to stop him in his tracks before he has to pay out again!

 

Any ideas? Thanks in advance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Points to consider are that

 

1. Holiday can only be taken with the agreement of the employer and in line with whatever policy exists regarding the booking of Annual Leave

2. Whilst there are rights for parents to take time off to deal with a family emergency and a dependant, there is no automatic right for this to be paid.

3. You have a right to 5.6 weeks (28 days) annual leave - paid at the prevailing rate for a week's salary.

 

Therefore, if a family emergency arises, then the employer is within their right to not allow this to be paid, however he cannot also deduct that time from paid annual leave. These are two completely separate things. By definition an emergency cannot be planned so therefore cannot be booked as 'holiday' as you would not be able to give the requisite month's notice, therefore any time taken will have to be unpaid unless the employer is willing to authorise it as 'holiday' and in that case it must be paid.

 

Long way of saying that you need to clarify with the employer that whilst staff taking time off to deal with family emergencies (as is a legal right) might no longer be allowed to take this as paid holiday, that holiday entitlement can not also be reduced for such time taken, and that this WOULD amount to an Unlawful Deduction and a claim could be brought in an Employment Tribunal.

Any advice given is done so on the assumption that recipients will also take professional advice where appropriate.

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

DONATE HERE

 

If I have been helpful in any way - please feel free to click on the STAR to the left!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you sidewinder, understood - Fat Controller plans for them to LOSE the day's holiday and not pay them for it either! Capoot, gone as if never existed. We shall see!

 

I do like this man, I have an argument with him every Xmas when he's had too much too drink - I don;t touch booze so I win everytime! (Only once a year though face to face!) He makes me feel that I would like to pull the bung out of his luxury yacht!

Link to post
Share on other sites

European working time directive gives you the right to your paid leave wit a prescribed minimum notice period and your employer must respond within a prescribed time if it is not possible to take the leave for "operational reasons". the notice required for a days leave is 1 day so put your request in writing and they will have to respond in writing the same day.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...