Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Speaking of the reformatory boys, here they are with all of their supporters, some of whom traveled with them from miles away, all carefully crammed together and photographed to look like there were more than about 80 .. rather like Farages last rally with even fewer people crammed around what looked like an ice cream van or mobile tea bar ... Although a number in the crowd apparently thought they were at a vintage car rally as they appeared to be chanting 'crank-her'. A vintage Bentley must be out of view.   Is this all there is? Its less than the Tory candidate. - shut up and smile while they get a camera angle that looks better
    • in order for us to help you we require the following information:- Which Court have you received the claim from ? Canterbury If possible please scan redact and upload a full page copy of page 1 of the claim form. ( Name of the Claimant ? Moneybarn No 1   How many defendant's  joint or self ? One Date of issue – top right hand corner of the claim form – this in order to establish the time line you need to adhere to. 29/05/24 Acknowledged by 14/06/24  Defence by 29/06/24  Particulars of Claim PARTICULARS OF CLAIM   1.  By a Conditional Sale Agreement in writing made on 25th August 2022. Between the Claimant and Defendant, the Claimant let to the Defendant on Conditional Sale. A Ford Ranger 3.2 TDCi (200 P S) 4x4 Wildtrack  Double Cab Pickup 3200cc (Sep.2015) Registration No, ******* Chassis number ***************** (“The Vehicle”).  A copy of the agreement is attached   2.  The price of the goods was £15,995.00.  The Initial Rental was £8500.00.  The total charge for credit was £3575.;17 And the balance of £11,070.17 was payable by 59 equal consecutive monthly instalments of £187 63. payable on the 25th of each month.   3.  The following were expressed conditions of the set agreement,   Clause 8: Our Right to End this Agreement  8.1   Subject to sending you the notice as required by law, any of the following events will entitle us to end this Agreement: 8.1.2  You fail to pay the advance payment (if any) or any of the payments as specified on the front page of this agreement or any other sum payable under this Agreement. 8.1.3 If any of the information you have given us before entering into this Agreement or during the term of this Agreement was false 8.1.4 We consider, acting reasonably, that the goods may be in jeopardy or that our rights in the goods may otherwise be prejudiced. 8.1.5 If you die 8.1.6 If a bankruptcy petition is presented against you; if you petition for your own bankruptcy, or make a live arrangement with your creditors or call a meeting of them. 8. 1.7 If in Scotland, you become insolvent or sequestration or a receiver, judicial factor or trustee to be appointed over any of your estate, or effects or suffer an arrestment, charge attachment or other diligence to be issued or levied on any of your estate or effects or suffer any exercise, or threatened exercise of landlords hype hypothec 8.1.8 If you are a partnership, you are dissolved 8.1.9 If the goods are destroyed, lost, stolen and/or treated by the insurer as a total loss in response to an insurance claim. 8.1.10 If we reasonably believe any payment made to us in respect of this Agreement is a proceed of crime. 8.1.11 If steps are taken by us to terminate any other agreement which you have entered into with us.   Clause 9.  Effect of Us Terminating Agreement   9.1 If this Agreement terminates under clause 8 the following will apply 9.1.1 Subject to the rights given to you by law, you will no longer be entitled to possession of the goods and must return them to us to an address as we may reasonably specify, (removing or commencing the removal of any cherished plates) together with a V5 registration certificate, both sets of keys and a service record book. If you are unable or unwilling to return the goods to us then we shall collect the goods and we'll charge you in accordance with clause 10.3 9.1.2 We will be entitled to immediate payment from you for all payments and all other sums do under this agreement at the date of termination 9.1.3 We will sell the goods or public sale at the earliest opportunity once the goods are in a reasonable condition which includes a return of the items listed in clause 7.1.4 9.1.4 We will be entitled to immediate payment from you of the rest of the Total Amount Payable under this agreement less: ( a) A rebate for early settlement ias required by law which will be calculated and notified to you at the time of payment (b) The proceeds of sale of the goods (if any) after deduction of all costs associated with finding you and/or the goods, recovery, refurbishment and repair. Insurance, storage, sale, agents fees, cherished plate removal, replacement keys, costs associated with obtaining service history for the goods and in relation to obtaining a duplicate V5 registration certificate   4, The following are particulars required by Civil Procedure Rules. Rule 7.9 as set out in 7.1 and 7.2 of the associated Practice Direction entitled Hire Purchase Claims:-   a)     The agreement is dated 25 August 2022. And is between Moneybarn No1 Limited  and xxxxxxxxx under agreement number 756050. b)    The claimant was one of the original parties to the agreement. c)    The agreement is regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. d)    The goods claimed Ford Ranger 3.2 TDCi ( 200 PS) 4x4 Wildtrack Double Cab Pickup 3200 cc (Sep2015} Registration No ^^^^^^^ Chassis number ***************** e)     Thw total price of the goods £19570 f)     The paid up sum £1206 5 g)    The unpaid balance of the total price £7505 (to include charges) h)    A default notice was sent to the defendant on 20th February 2024 by Firrst class post i)      The date when the right to demand delivery of the goods accrued 14 March 2024 j)      The amount if any claimed as an alternative to delivery of the goods 7505 22 include charges ]= 5.  A the date of service of the notice the instalments were £562.89 in arrears. 6. By reason of the Termination of the Agreement by the notice, defendant became liable to pay the sum of £7502 7. The date of maturity the agreement is 24th August 2027. 8. Further or  alternative by reasons of  the Defendant breaches of the agreement by failing to pay the said instalments, the Defendant evinced an intention no longer to be bound by the Agreement and repudiated it by the said Notice the claimant accepted that repudiation 9. By reason of such repudiation the claimant has suffered loss and damage.   Total amount payable £19570 Less sum paid or in arrears by the date of repudiation £12064 97 Balance £7505 (to include charges.) ( The claimant will give credit if necessary for the value of the vehicle if recovered.)  The claimant therefore claims 1.    An order for delivery up of the vehicle 2.    The MoneyClaim to be adjourned generally with liberty to restore,  Upon restoration of the MoneyClaim following return or loss of the vehicle. the Claimant will ensure the pre action protocol for debt claims is followed. 3.    Pursuant to s 90 (1)  of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. An order that the Claimant and/or its agents may enter any premises in which the vehicle is situated in order to recover the vehicle should it not be returned by the Defendant 4.    further or alternatively damages 5.    costs.   Statement of truth The Claimant believes that the facts stated in these Particulars of Claim are true. The Claimant understands that the proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes or causes to be made a false statement in the document for verified by statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. I am duly Authorised by the Claimant to sign these Particulars of Claim signed Dated 17th of April 2024   What is the total value of the claim? 7502   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? No   Never heard of this   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? n/a Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? No   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After  Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? In a garage  Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes  Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Original Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? n/a   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? They said sent but nor received   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? None seen   Why did you cease payments? Still Paying,   What was the date of your last payment? Yesterday  31st May 2024   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? Yes on 12 Feb 2024   What you need to do now.   Can't scan, will do via another means as you cant have jpg
    • Now that is an interesting article which adds afew perspective that I hadn't thought significant - but on reflection of the perspectives offered ... Now Starmer is no Blair, however 'blairite he may be perceived, but the Tories aren't tories and aren't even remotely liberal   The fast 'unannounced and unexpected election call from sunack may well be explained by the opinion linked that he hoped reform would be unprepared and effectively call a chunk of Farages largely empty bluster - making him look even more of a prat, leave scope for attacks on shabby reform candidates and mimimise core vote losses to reform - while throwing the 'middle ground' (relative) tories TO THE DOGS - and with the added bonus of likely pacifying his missu' desire to jogg off to sunny cal tout suite somewhat   thumb in the air - I expect about 140ish tory seats, but can hope for under a hundred Reform - got to admit the outside possibility of 1, maybe 2 seats with about 8% of the vote - but unlikely. I think projections of over 10% of the vote for reform is nudged and paid for speculation - but possible with the expected massive drives from Russian, Chinese and far right social media bot and troll prods targeting the gullible.
    • Commentary June 2024 WWW.ELECTORALCALCULUS.CO.UK Interesting article about just how bad it could be for the Tories.  Also Tories could be hoping on Reform not having candidates in many seats, as they were not ready.  
    • Even a Piers Morgan is an improvement and a gutless Farage Piers Morgan calls for second Brexit referendum WWW.THELONDONECONOMIC.COM Piers Morgan and Nigel Farage have faced off over Brexit and a second referendum in a heated reunion on BBC Question Time.   “Why don’t we have another referendum about Brexit?” he questioned. “I seem to remember when 2016 came around we were told there was going to be control of our borders and it was going to be economically beneficial to this country. And eight years later we have lost complete control of our borders… and economically it seems to have been a wilful act of self-harm.”   ... Piers missed off : after all somebody said a 48/52 decision would be "unfinished business" by a long way - was that person just bul lying (again)  
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Disciplinary - Gross Misconduct


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4089 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

  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Ok. You need to stop focussing on "who grassed you" and work on heart felt apology.

 

I would also busy myself with getting my CV in order.

 

IF they dismiss - and they may not - ask how they feel about a reference confirming dates of employment only as standard.

 

If they do not dismiss and you need to go back = we will cross that one, and how you will handle any stress - then. Put it aside for now.

 

There may be a fabulous job out there for you, but you need to get applying to get it. Have you been to temp agencies yet? A couple of decent temp contracts can very quickly cover the bases of 2 good last references :) You just need a shiny CV and a wee bit of luck.

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.

 

I think I know who it was who spied. I just wanted the company to be aware that these messages weren't stumbled upon, that someone sought them out.

 

In the notes I have received from the meeting, I don't agree with what has been recored. It's just the wording of it but I don't agree. How do I handle that?

 

Already started working on my CV. Should have it finished today.

 

Do you think I should call citizens advice? Will they help?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, I thought I did apologise throughout the meeting, though it doesn't seem to be recorded in the notes. The investigating staff member has put in their notes that I "demonstrated a level of remorse". I was crying that much maybe I should try and keep the tears in and concentrate on saying sorry.

 

No idea how to deal with this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You send the notes back with your amendments to be noted. Stick to big ticket items, don't pick over the bones.

 

Include any expansion you would like on "level of remorse" eg any actual words you used that you would like included. You need to be clear it is "I am sorry I did it and now I see why it was bad" as opposed to "I am sorry I got caught."

 

I'm not sure CAB will be able to tell you anything different but by all means book in to see them. I'd never say no!

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

Hi all,

 

I am to attend a disciplinary for gross misconduct and one of the allegations against me is that I have used social networking sites in work time.

 

I wasn't fully aware of the communication policy (stupid, I know) and I believed it was being reviewed because of comments made from senior management that with the current wording everyone would be in breach. Also, the atmosphere within my company is so relaxed and a lot of staff members use social networking sites in work time - and not just on their phones but using company computer systems. I have never been spoken to regarding the use of my phone in the 18 months I've worked there and it has never impacted my work.

 

I have over 100 screenshots that show other staff members using social networking sites on work time, would it be unreasonable to provide these as evidence that have not been alone in breaching the policy?

 

I also have evidence of emails I have sent and received outside of my normal working hours. I thought that perhaps these would show that although they may be able to say that I have wasted a few minutes here and there, that I have also worked above and beyond my normal working hours.

 

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Anonn. That issue in itself cannot be claimed as gross misconduct. Many employers misunderstand this. Gross misconduct is only applicable when the employee has done something so outrageous or serious that it goes through the heart of the contract and shatters it. It is for instances when the employer could not possible be expected to continue to employ the person. Setting precedents is really important in gross misconduct and to allow a practice to continue and then suddenly claim it is GM is not acceptable. However, you say that this is one of the issues. Can you give us an idea what the others are?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi EmployLaw,

 

I am suspended, yes.

 

The other allegation relates also to social networking sites and the use of abusive, threatening and/or offensive language. The letter also states that the company feel that the duty of care has been breached and that the alleged misconduct was so incompatible with the employee's duties and responsibilities that continued presence within the company is insupportable.

 

The relates to comments made on a social networking site, on an account I believed was anonymous. The account did not hold my full name, never mentioned the company nor any of my work colleagues. This account was meant to be private and personal - though I am now aware that this is very rarely the case when it comes to the internet and in hindsight I am aware I was misguided and naive.

 

Some of the comments were abusive/offensive and used profanity. However, they were meant to be tongue in cheek and almost a parody. I understand that my employer does not see it this way and seeing the comments laid out was quite horrifying and embarrassing.

 

I had went to great lengths to ensure the account could not be accessed from anyone from my "real life". I had blocked colleagues and company accounts from accessing my profile and I also ensured I did not make a direct reference by name to anyone from my real life.

The account was deleted as soon as I learnt of the allegations against me.

 

From the evidence the company provided me - screenshots - it is apparent that someone within the company made an alias account. I know this because the email (name.name@emaildotcom) was shown on a number of screenshots, and you could also clearly see the company system on one of the tabs. Yet the name in the email is of no one linked with the company. I'm not sure if this has any effect on anything, but it has made me feel singled out and spied on.

I also think I may be aware who took the screenshots because of other things present on the page.

 

Before Christmas HR sent out a reminder about the communication policy and the use of social network sites. This was the same day the screenshots are dated. 2 days after the email was sent out I went to HR to gain some clarification re: the policy and my use of social networking. I was told directly that the email was not sent out for me, and I was also told that as long as my profile was not searchable with my name and the companies, if I did not mention the company or my colleagues direct then I had nothing to worry about. gain, I don't know if this gives me any fight within the disciplinary, but I do feel I tried to take responsibility and was advised that I was not breaching the policy.

 

I do believe that the company have already decided the outcome and that either way I will be managed out of the business. I do think that they will fire me before they even have to manage me out of the business. Within the last 12 months there have been a number of staff members who have went on "extended leave" and have not returned once their face no longer fits, but also, to be fair, due to disciplinaries.

 

I am unsure how to approach the meeting. Of course I am remorseful - I love my job and I am devastated that I may have caused embarrassment to the company and to myself - but I am also apprehensive about attending and being remorseful only and not having any kind of fight, because I do believe they will just get rid of me.

 

I'm really stuck and not sure what to do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Anonn. In your position, I would review the policy in great detail and see what the actual breach is. If the policy is only breached on postings which could bring the company into disrepute, go into the meeting with the defence that the content of the posts and threads shouldn't matter as they are private and anonymous and not directed at the company, service users or colleagues. They can only claim injury to reputation if reputation was injured or could have been. There is no link. The breach therefore is the posting within works time using works systems, not what was actually posted. Then your defence is that despite the policy being in place, it was widely practiced by all to use works systems to access and post on the internet so you are being singled out and treated unfairly due to inconsistent application of the policy. If you will be disciplined, all should be disciplined. It would help greatly if you provide evidence of others doing the same. Steer the hearing chairperson away from the content and more to the breach of policy. It would be really helpful if you could bullet-point the policy details here in brief so that I can see what the actual 'offence' is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi EmployLaw,

 

I had the disciplinary meeting yesterday. I took a large amount of evidence with me, showing other members of staff using social media in work time, and also using profanity and language that was offensive and that could embarrass or breach the trust/confidence of the company. I stated that my evidence was not brought to get anyone else into trouble, only to show that the policies are not clear enough, or understood and that if I had breached them, I was not alone.

 

During the meeting I tried to establish what it was exactly that they had the problem with - that they couldn't get passed, that made my employment there now insupportable. I was told it wasn't that I had used social media in work time, that happens they said and they have been very relaxed, It didn't even appear to be some of the more offensive things I had said. They said it was because of the posts were I had referred to "my boss" and "my staff". Though I must point out that I did not name them, me or the company at any time. I was in no way linked to the company or my colleagues, or indeed my real life.

 

I have a query though. I believe my employers have lied about how they found my account and how they gained the screenshots. That I perhaps was not shown all of the evidence surrounding their case against me. Where do I stand with this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The question is not how you got caught. It is whether or not you did it.

 

Have you had the result of the dsicplinary yet?

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

So that I was lied to in the meeting and that I don't believe an audit was carried out - an audit that they are saying linked me to their corporate account and therefore may damage the company - doesn't matter?

 

I haven't had the result yet but it's clear I will be dismissed. I've had some legal advice (before the meeting) who agreed they would dismiss me and that I may have a chance for unfair dismissal.

 

I would prefer not to get dismissed and perhaps come to a compromise agreement (is that correct?). I know the company have done this on 3 other occasions within the last 18 months and dismissed one.

 

In the meeting yesterday they got very flustered when I questioned the finer details (as instructed legally and by acas).

In addition it appears I was monitored but there is nothing in any of the policies that state that that may occur.

 

I'm sorry if I appear to be grasping at straws but I have been lied to, or at least misled and I'm going to lose my job while others will only get a slapped wrist.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't think they have a case for gross misconduct here Anonn, not that this will stop them believing that they have and taking the wrong action. As hard as it is, don't lose heart until you have the outcome. Are they taking legal advice? You mentioned a HR org going in to see them, is this an outside legal adviser?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The company isn't very big and so they work with an outside HR org, yes. They did state yesterday that they sought legal advice - or words to that affect, though I'm not convinced.

 

I just wondered if I should approach them and advise them that I am aware of some details they did not provide in the meeting, that I feel I have been unfairly targeted, or wait until the actual meeting.

 

I have discovered that the 3rd party they claim they instructed to audit traffic to/from one of their social media accounts, is owned/ran by the husband of the colleague I suspect has it in for me (office politics, she used to be my boss, I'm now doing her job). And I believe that the company he owns does not/cannot do the things my employer stated in the meeting yesterday.

 

Oh, it's just so much adds up now - in a completely different way to how my employers tried to claim yesterday - and I feel that they are just trying to get rid of me, while others will get off with it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok. If they are taking legal advice, they may be warned off dismissal as they don't have strong grounds for GM, depends who's advising them though. I understand your comments about how difficult it would be to go back, but just think that if somebody has purposely set out to get you dismissed and they fail, in your shoes I'd go back with great flare! Talk about being one up! If they dismiss, update here as soon as possible as you will likely only have 5 to 7 days to appeal and you need to specify your grounds to appeal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What is your ideal (realistic) outcome that you want to get to?

 

Clean reference mainly and money to get by? I'm scared of the impact being dismissed for gross misconduct will have on future employment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

then you probably want to avoid an ET. It'll keep you hanging on a goood while especially with all the delaying tactics around provision of data.

 

I would probably have a conversation with HR at appeal stage if it gets that far.

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

So that I was lied to in the meeting and that I don't believe an audit was carried out - an audit that they are saying linked me to their corporate account and therefore may damage the company - doesn't matter?

 

I haven't had the result yet but it's clear I will be dismissed. I've had some legal advice (before the meeting) who agreed they would dismiss me and that I may have a chance for unfair dismissal.

 

I would prefer not to get dismissed and perhaps come to a compromise agreement (is that correct?). I know the company have done this on 3 other occasions within the last 18 months and dismissed one.

 

In the meeting yesterday they got very flustered when I questioned the finer details (as instructed legally and by acas).

In addition it appears I was monitored but there is nothing in any of the policies that state that that may occur.

 

I'm sorry if I appear to be grasping at straws but I have been lied to, or at least misled and I'm going to lose my job while others will only get a slapped wrist.

 

The problem is you say it was all anonymous, no names etc, but the fact is if the company could identify you and themselves, then maybe they can justifiably believe others could too.

 

I agree procedure, lack of clarity in the procedure, and possibly the company not properly enforcing it, so making it unclear what is and isn't acceptable may be your best bets. Presumably you'll be able to appeal if you can find grounds?

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is you say it was all anonymous, no names etc, but the fact is if the company could identify you and themselves, then maybe they can justifiably believe others could too.

 

I agree procedure, lack of clarity in the procedure, and possibly the company not properly enforcing it, so making it unclear what is and isn't acceptable may be your best bets. Presumably you'll be able to appeal if you can find grounds?

 

I understand your first point. It's so frustrating. They said similar and said that the reason they're looking at it so unfavourably is what if a staff member seen it? But I had sought clarification from HR and was advised I wasn't breaching any policies so I truly believed it was ok - how stupid and naive was I?! I could kick myself. If it was a huge company with a hardline stance about things then I would expect nothing less, but there is little consistency in the way they deal with things.

 

It's gone too far now and I'm out (tbc) so I suppose I just need to get on with it and see if I have serious grounds for appeal/can come to an agreement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...