Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • p'haps not the best thing to do just use the N244.and the ex160 let them sort it out don't complicate things..   don't worry about the bailiffs there isn't really anything they can do there is no right of forced entry upon consumer debt CCJ enforcement.    
    • again you appear not to be understanding things.....   a default does not go statute barred - as carefully explained in post 4....once it reaches its 6th birthday it along with the associated account will be removed from your file. that happening has no effect on the debt itself. it does not mean it is no owed.    your debt is NOT statute barred it has a CCJ . should the claimant fail to enforce the CCJ by it's 6th birthday, when, as with a default, it falls off your credit file, then they would need to return to court to do so. and again that happening has no effect upon the debt itself.   they both operate under the same ICO rule, quoted as in post 4..   All references to a defaulted debt must be removed from your credit files after 6 years  has passed from date of default, whether paid off, paying now or not.  . This is so that someone who continues paying something  - even after 6 years from default  - should not be at a disadvantage to someone who pays nothing after default  and ends up with a clean file after 6 years. 
    • Pleased to say that the default has gone from my credit report due to being SB. My Experian credit score is now 978 out of 999 and excellent. Experian doesn’t show my 2 x CCJ’s. Equifax’s shows just 1.    my question is this.... clearly the debt is still owed for the SB debt, the CCJ is still live until June next year.   Can I make an offer of 10% to settle the debt now that it’s SB? If so is there a letter template that I can send to them to make such an offer?   thanks in advance 
    • Your position is not untenable in any way. You have already mitigated partially any impending disaster by opening another non Paypal linked bank account so they cannot arbitrarily seize what they want.   First thing to remember you are in control here. Whatever you offer to pay them must be something you can reasonably afford even if its only a pound a week and you must pay it to Paypal. If like me they freeze your account then there is no way you can reasonably pay them. They are not going to give you another account to pay it into.   The reason I got into difficulties with them was because I had recurring large payments being made to a supplier of mine which continued after I was rushed into hospital for series of emergency operations. When I came out of hospital Paypal had simply frozen the account which I discovered when I tried to pay money into it to alleviate the huge deficit that had accrued. So I paid nothing of what I owed. I received about 4 or 5 threatening missives which I ignored as well as any phone calls. I tried for several months to make payments into the account and in the end I gave up. Despite all the threats nothing actually happened.   If you read all the answers to your posting as well as all the other Paypal posts I doubt you will find any evidence of Paypal doing very much to enforce outstanding balances and funnily enough they do not make it easy for those that wish to repay them as I discovered.   So stop getting yourself into a flap over something that is very unlikely to be nothing more than a storm in a tea cup.   Make or start you offer to re-pay them at a figure you can easily afford then forget all about them except to make your regular payment if you can still do so.   DO NOT under any circumstances get yourself deeper into debt over this.
    • she certainly hasn't any authority to 'fine' you. what was in the contract regarding vacating the property by when?  
  • Our picks


Do I have a case???

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2523 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi,new to this but need a little advice, I am seeking legal advice through the proper channels but any extra info./advice is always useful.



A few weeks ago, the place where I work informed us that they were wishing to make cutbacks, starting by offering us short time working of 3 days a week. After a couple of meetings, and awkward questions by myself, they told us they were imposing it on us.


A little digging around by myself and I found that this was potentially a fundamental breech ofcontract, namely that they cannot impose a change such as this unless a varying term is used in the contract or terms and conditions to allow this(the contracts are very very very basic).


I actively protested against this, we have no union being a small company of around 20. I voiced my concerns to no avail. Management refused to speak to myself and a few others and as a result I became ill to the point of being prescribed anti-depressants.


I handed in a 'work under protest' letter and also started a grievance, believe it or not my employer has no grievance procedure!!!!, so I followed the A.C.A.S. code of practice, 29 days have passed and still no formal meeting (tribunal???).


Deadline for contracts was 10th December, few days before management had received no signed contracts and suddenly dropped the action (I wonder why!!) , 'There will be a business review in January'.


So when asked I was told there would probably be redundancies. Anyway, I have been on a fixed term contract for 2 years now, most recent one ends 28th December.


I was informed on the 16th December that my contract would not be renewed, I was told ' The business needs to make cutbacks,starting with me' . Some more digging around and I am hoping to take them to a tribunal for unfair dismissal for asserting my employment rights, and for less favourable treatment of a fixed term employee on the grounds that


1 - another employee got a permanent contract , a position which I should have been made aware of


2 - Actively exercising my rights under employment law and being dismissed as a result(no-one else has suffered) and


3 - Not being considered or pooled for potential redundancy, fixed term contract law says that I should be pooled and not just left for my contract to expire.


So do I have any chance???


No grievance meeting?


Less favourable treatment?


Unfair dismissal?


Possible H.S.E. regs. broke regarding stress at work?


My employer has no procedures for grievances, they tend to brush any problems under the carpet or put them off so people dont take action. They dont like confrontation, have already got rid of one employee and paid them to keep quiet, they dont seem to have a clue.


This past few weeks have been hell for myself and family, Im also trying to study a degree, seriously thinking about making it in employment law due to the hours I have put into reading legislations!!


Thanks to anyone who takes the time to read this and if anyone offers any help/advice

Edited by citizenB

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Redundancy is a potentially "fair reason" to dismiss. However, if the redundancy selection process was unfair - as you say, you were singled out - then that would make it an unfair redundancy. You have all the documentation as evidence. Ask them to put their statement about cutbacks starting with you in writing. As soon as you are dismissed, file a claim.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reply, Sorry if i didn't make it clear but I have not actually been made redundant. My fixed term contract ends on the 28th December and I have been told it will not be renewed. I was also told a couple of weeks ago that redundancies were likely in January. Basically I feel I have been let go beacuse I stood up to them in the first instance, regarding proposed contract changes. They have never had anyone stand up to them before!!! Anyway, spoke to a solicitor Wednesday, they said I was 'up against it', but they did say it was not a definate no to having a chance of winning a case. Waiting for some more letters off my management, hopefully soon, then thinking about representing myself at a tribunal!!! Maybe a daft idea, but I feel I have nothing to lose.

If anyone has any advice about self representation it would be gratefully accepted!!!

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...