Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Good evening DX100   Here is a draft of my response to the court order.  I would be obliged if you could review it and avise me if I am on the right track.   Defendant Statement of Position in Response to the Order of the Sheriff   The defendant suffered Severe Depression illness almost 12 months prior to the closer of the Bank account. HBOS was made aware of the defendant illness.  A Medical Certificate dated 15 Sept 2017 was handed over to the bank as a proof. (A copy of the report will be submitted exclusively to the court review) The defendant, with the support of her ex-partner, sought a resolution from the OC regarding the escalation of her OD account, which it was mostly formed of extortionate bank charges/penalties being applied to the account. HBOS agreed to reduce the outstand OD sum to £XXX and closed the account. The defendant is confident that her ex-partner has settled the agreed sum with OC, but not absolutely certain, considering her health state at that time. She has been actively trying to reach for her ex-partner for documented evidence, but the fact that, we believe, he is a currently deployed by the UK military forces abroad and communication has been, to put it politely, very difficult due to the nature of his deployment. As the court is aware, the defendant has been trying to retrieve the data of her dealing with/from OC which it should reflect history of the above.  The defendant has already written twice to HBOS, as well as visiting her bank branch, on 01 March 2021, in person demanding the requested data.  HBOS promised to send the data to her as soon as they can. In addition to the above reasoning and contend, the defendant refute the claimants claim is owed or payable.  Due to punitive and extortionate fees the facility became untenable. Any alleged balance  claimed will consist totally of default penalties, punitive charges levied on the account for alleged late, rejected or over limit payments. The court will be aware that these charge types and the recoverability thereof have been judicially declared to be susceptible to assessments of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 The Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National PLC and others (2009). I will contend at trial that such charges are unfair in their entirety and any alleged balance was due to punitive and extortionate charges . It is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. Therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:-               a.    Provide a copy agreement/facility arrangement along with the Terms and Conditions at inception, which this claim is based on.               b.    Provide a copy of the Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand /Recall Notice and Notice of Assignment.               c.    Provide a breakdown of their excessive charging/fees levied to the account and justify how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed.               d.    Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.               e.    Evidence how they have complied with sections III & IV of Practice Direction - Pre-action Conduct.     10.   By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
    • Same thing. The fact that you declared £4.99 means that is the extent of any reasonable foreseeably consequence. Just go for that small amount. If they cause any problems then you can have a laugh when they spend many times more than what you're claiming in order to resist you. In future, when you contract with somebody – you need to understand that effectively it is an exchange of the reasonable expectations which you create in each other by your agreement.  
    • Current situation: contacted myhermes website's robot talk about the parcel and waiting for their email response. Thanks @BankFodder   I understand that if I were going to pursue under contract law, £4.99 would be the amount that I am entitled for compensate. How about if I were going to pursue this matter under tort - negligence? Would this allow me to pursue them according the true value of the items?
    • Hi UncleB, thanks for responding. I did call them back and it appears to be hit & miss with Devitt and dependent upon which Customer service agent you get.   Spoke with a very pleasant lady and told her that I, like them recorded all calls and gave date time of call and specific time at which a green card was stipulated in order for me to take out the policy.   *Two days later a hard copy of the green card landed on my doorstep. *Free of charge too.
    • Have you received a Parking Ticket? - Private Land Parking Enforcement - Consumer Action Group   please complete the above then we'll be best placed to advise further but the bottom line is no and don't ever appeal.    
  • Our picks

    • Ebay Packlink and Hermes - destroyed item as it was "damaged". https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/430396-ebay-packlink-and-hermes-destroyed-item-as-it-was-damaged/&do=findComment&comment=5087347
      • 25 replies
    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
  • Recommended Topics

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2733 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

my employer over the past 4 years has carried out two enhanced CRB checks on me and all has been fine. My employer has never had a complaint about me and I have been an outstanding employee. Recently after a meeting with an external agency they have been made aware I had two allegations of assult on my CRB and these go back 4 plus years. Both cases were dropped and not proven. They were false allegations against me. My employer was never concerned before and had the information but now that some external agency i.e police or social services have raised it with them they are pursuing it and I am facing a dismissal hearing. I stated to my employer why was this not mentioned when they intially did the CRB 4 years ago. The answer was now the external agency has made us aware we must act. Can someone advise me if they dismiss me do I have a case of unfair dismissal or how should I argue my case when I am at the hearing? any help is appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What you don't say is what your job is. O think that is pretty important. But i would also have to ask why they did not act before if they were on your crb and what makes it different now.

Have you had an investigation meeting.

Any opinion I give is from personal experience .

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

What I would think about requesting from the Employers is.

 

1. What was the Enhanced CRB Policy and Procedure - 4years ago and you require a copy.

2. What is the Enhanced CRB Policy and Procedure - Latest Version and you require a copy.

 

Now what does your Contract of Employment state about Enhanced CRB Checks?

How to Upload Documents/Images on CAG - **INSTRUCTIONS CLICK HERE**

FORUM RULES - Please ensure to read these before posting **FORUM RULES CLICK HERE**

I cannot give any advice by PM - If you provide a link to your Thread then I will be happy to offer advice there.

I advise to the best of my ability, but I am not a qualified professional, benefits lawyer nor Welfare Rights Adviser.

Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

therese not alot on contract of employment on crb bit i believe it states you must pass crb checks, i would need to check it properly. i visit lots of peoples homes in my job doing surveyes and maybe my employer is getting worried since this other agency or someone has raised concerns. i have never given them any reason to be concerned. I dont believe the crb policy has changed over the years. I just feel someone important has raised it and now they feel they must do something. i havnt had any meetings yet to discuss the matter, they are to be arranged.

Link to post
Share on other sites
therese not alot on contract of employment on crb bit i believe it states you must pass crb checks, i would need to check it properly. i visit lots of peoples homes in my job doing surveyes and maybe my employer is getting worried since this other agency or someone has raised concerns. i have never given them any reason to be concerned. I dont believe the crb policy has changed over the years. I just feel someone important has raised it and now they feel they must do something. i havnt had any meetings yet to discuss the matter, they are to be arranged.

 

There is no "pass" or "fail" of a CRB, just what information is provided.

 

If the allegations were false, then they will not be recorded as a conviction or caution, but under "other information at Chief Officer's discretion".

 

You should advise your employer that the allegations were false, and that you intend to appeal the information featuring on your CRB.

 

"Information at the Chief Officer's discretion" policy changed in Sept 2012.

 

Subjects can now challenge the presentation of such information if it isn't relevant.

From : http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/agencies-public-bodies/dbs/corporate-publications/disclosure-and-barring-changes/leaflet-england-wales?view=Binary

 

6. Police information held locally – more rigorous relevancy test and new right of review

Currently, the police provide information held locally on enhanced CRB certificates when they consider it to be relevant to the purpose for which the certificate was requested. This will continue, but the police

will now apply a more rigorous test before deciding whether to disclose information. At the moment they include information if it ‘might be relevant’ and ought to be disclosed. From September, they will include it if they ‘reasonably believe [it] to be relevant’ and consider that it ought to be disclosed.

In addition, if any of that information is included on an enhanced CRB certificate and the applicant does not think that it should be, they will now be able to ask the Independent Monitor to review it, and the Independent Monitor can ask the CRB to issue a new certificate, either without that information or with amendments to it. Applicants should be encouraged to inform you when they request such a review and to update you about what happens with their certificate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparantly i should have declared all allegations to my employer too. I informed them i do not need to declare allegations. I have been told because the law has gone strict i am now seen as a risk when visiting people.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think they have a strong case Amy. Can you answer a couple of questions for me? When the CRB checks were done over the past couple of years, did anything show up and did they meet with you about it? In other words, did they know and not have a problem with it until a third party interfered? Did you receive any sort of conviction as a result of the allegations? Even a bind over or caution? Can you remember as far back as the time that you applied, did the application form ask about just convictions or anything pending too?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Amy, I just heard something about CRB on the news. If I heard it right (I was chopping onions and crying at the time!) it seems that the court has found that (in these two cases anyway) the use of CRB is against Human Rights. One was a 21 yr old male who received a caution at 11 which kept coming up everytime he applied for a job. I believe the government are looking to appeal.

 

I also understand how upset you are. When these things were first introduced, my then partner, almost lost a job of many years because of it. When he was 17 he thought it a wonderful idea to fashion a tax disc out of a piece of cornflake packet and fix it to his scooter. Got a caution. Anyway just after his 42nd birthday, they introduced these things, and he was actually suspended because they tried to say he hadn't disclosed it! For goodness sake he only recalled it when it came to light. He was in a Union and they sorted it out for the nonsense that it was.

 

I hope you get this sorted out - it is a complete and utter load of old twaddle.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw that too, J&W. As I heard it, there is a delay before anything is likely to happen, but it would be nice if this helped the OP.

 

I'll try to find a link and post it as a separate thread.

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

They knew about it all because they spoke to me about 1 conviction about 6 months back and they were happy to allow me to continue with employment. I was sent the crb at the time and everything was on it. They never mentioned the other notes and alligations until this other party got involved. Iv been told the law has changed on child safty and as im out visiting people i am now a possible risk. I dont think i would have had any problems if it wasnt for this other party who brought it up. I have worked hard and never had any complaints on me at work. These false alligations have really affected my life.

Link to post
Share on other sites
my employer over the past 4 years has carried out two enhanced CRB checks on me and all has been fine. My employer has never had a complaint about me and I have been an outstanding employee. Recently after a meeting with an external agency they have been made aware I had two allegations of assult on my CRB and these go back 4 plus years. Both cases were dropped and not proven. They were false allegations against me. My employer was never concerned before and had the information but now that some external agency i.e police or social services have raised it with them they are pursuing it and I am facing a dismissal hearing. I stated to my employer why was this not mentioned when they intially did the CRB 4 years ago. The answer was now the external agency has made us aware we must act. Can someone advise me if they dismiss me do I have a case of unfair dismissal or how should I argue my case when I am at the hearing? any help is appreciated.

 

 

They knew about it all because they spoke to me about 1 conviction about 6 months back and they were happy to allow me to continue with employment. I was sent the crb at the time and everything was on it. They never mentioned the other notes and alligations until this other party got involved. Iv been told the law has changed on child safty and as im out visiting people i am now a possible risk. I dont think i would have had any problems if it wasnt for this other party who brought it up. I have worked hard and never had any complaints on me at work. These false alligations have really affected my life.

 

Your initial post (quoted) didn't mention a conviction, only the allegations where no prosecution / caution resulted.

 

Is the conviction for an offence involving violence? When was the conviction (if recent, it might be that the police chose not to release the extra info previously, but have been influenced to release it by the conviction?)

Edited by BazzaS
Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I am aware the court were concerned with offences of a minor not affecting the future prospects of someone in employment, one case involved someone who had 2 cautions when they were 11, that makes sense to me. The OP didnt say how old they were when their these 2 allegations were made and just because they were dropped dosnt mean the offence may not have happened just that there was insuffficient evidence to be realetivly sure of a conviction. however assuming the OP is innocent the arrests will still be on your record although not on the CRB and the police can give this information out if they feal it is relevent.

The OP should have told their employer about these allegations. More worrying is the fact that the OP does have a conviction although we dont know what for. The employer has a duty of care to the people that their employees visit and so have to be very careful who they employ and if these allegations have only just come to light I can see that they would have to suspend the OP while investigating.

Hopfully the clean work record and honesty on the part of the employee will result in a return to work fairly soon unless as previously said the conviction was recent in which case it may be a different matter.

If I have been of any help, please click on my star and let me know, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Will your employer be providing a service on behalf of this outside agency? If so, then your employer (and you by carrying out the service) is representing this outside agency and I would think they could set stricter terms than your employer has to date. Equally, if this is the case, is there any way your employer could maintain your level of work if you didn't do anything connected to that outside agency?

 

Just questions to mull over as to why something that wasn't an issue previously could now cause problems!!

 

Feebee_71

Link to post
Share on other sites

They will be working with this agency and im guessing its a jointly funded work. There is plenty of other positions within my work where im not working directly with the public. Im worried if i ask to be moved its a sign of guilt and they may think i myself am saying im a risk when im not. I have seen other employees moved into other positions due to personal issues but i dont know if they will want to keep me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Moving you may be their only option Amy. If they accepted your past and were happy to continue working with you, they now have third party pressure due to another agency becoming involved. In that situation, they could end your contract under SOSR (Some Other Substantial Reason). However, before doing so, the employer must take into account the extent of any injustice to the employee. If the employer fails to do so, the dismissal may be unfair. Have a read of two cases which were won by the employee, you can google them. They don't relate to CRB checks, but they do relate to SOSR due to third party pressure. Dando v Britannia Services Group Ltd and Greenwood v Whiteghyll Plastics. Study them and use them in your disciplinary to warn the employer that dismissal may be unfair and they have a duty to move you into another post if one is available. They cannot create a role for you so make sure that other work is available. They have a duty to move other people around to slot you in.

Link to post
Share on other sites
They will be working with this agency and im guessing its a jointly funded work. There is plenty of other positions within my work where im not working directly with the public. Im worried if i ask to be moved its a sign of guilt and they may think i myself am saying im a risk when im not. I have seen other employees moved into other positions due to personal issues but i dont know if they will want to keep me.

 

Your initial post (quoted above) didn't mention a conviction, only the allegations where no prosecution / caution resulted.

 

Is the conviction for an offence involving violence? When was the conviction (if recent, it might be that the police chose not to release the extra info previously, but have been influenced to release it by the conviction?)

 

It is hard to offer advice likely to be valid without this additional information.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I got a conviction for stoping a dispute no violence involved and because i was there they convicted me anyway. Work did a crb a week afta this and it showed up along with the previous alligations. They asked me about conviction only and they saw the alligations on there but no mention of them. I explained the conviction and they were happy to allow my employment to continue. But 4 yrs on these alligations have been dragged up by someone. They were false alligations of assult on a miner which i did not do. I reported some kids for swearing at me they went and made alligations to police. Anyway now im some how a risk to people and im probably going to get sacked for this all beacuse safeguarding children is a major priority now. I couldnt agree more with this but im not a risk to anyone. If anything i have reported people myself for neglect of children. Not sure where i stand with all this now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I do believe that far more often than we imagine people are wrongly convicted or at least convicted for the wrong crime. I also believe that the hysteria caused by a global 24 hour news culture has made people paranoid. However saying that, if i was told that someone had been accused twice of some type of child abuse then i would wonder.

Any opinion I give is from personal experience .

Link to post
Share on other sites

Only one alligation was from a minor the other was a spitefull ex. I was meant to have swore to the minor i wasnt an abuser or something like that. No charges or cautions were given to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 7 months later...
Moving you may be their only option Amy. If they accepted your past and were happy to continue working with you, they now have third party pressure due to another agency becoming involved. In that situation, they could end your contract under SOSR (Some Other Substantial Reason). However, before doing so, the employer must take into account the extent of any injustice to the employee. If the employer fails to do so, the dismissal may be unfair. Have a read of two cases which were won by the employee, you can google them. They don't relate to CRB checks, but they do relate to SOSR due to third party pressure. Dando v Britannia Services Group Ltd and Greenwood v Whiteghyll Plastics. Study them and use them in your disciplinary to warn the employer that dismissal may be unfair and they have a duty to move you into another post if one is available. They cannot create a role for you so make sure that other work is available. They have a duty to move other people around to slot you in.

Noticeably Dando and Greenwood are both employment law cases. An alternative is to use the recently consolidated intentional economic tort of procurement of breach of contract. There are several advantages: (a) you don't have to prove any of that unfairness rubbish; (b) you don't have to prove knowledge (that it would cause breach of contract), turning a blind eye is enough; © likewise you don't have to prove intention; (d) you don't even have to go after the employer, who if anything will become on-side as they also will have their own case against the third party for recruitment costs, legal costs at tribunals etc. However, because good faith is a defence, this should probably be targeted against the people who knew that processing the data was unlawful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As you say it doesn't mean they didn't happen, but if it can't be proven that they happened, surely they should be taken as though they didn't happen.

 

If not then any unfounded allegation can be held against you, where is the justice in that.

 

Shall we decide Kevin Webster carried out the alleged assaults, he was found innocent because they couldn't prove his guilt.

 

Or are you using employment discipline case to say he was guilty in probability.

 

just because they were dropped dosnt mean the offence may not have happened just that there was insuffficient evidence to be realetivly sure of a conviction. however assuming the OP is innocent the arrests will still be on your record although not on the CRB and the police can give this information out if they feal it is relevent.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...