Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hello dx100uk, After months of waiting for a response I finally got a reply and I must say it was the worst 4 months of my life the - fear of the unknown. So, they wrote back and said I was in the wrong BUT on this occasion they  would not take action but keep me on file for the next 12 months. It. was the biggest relief of my life a massive weight lifted -  I would like to thank you and the team for all your support
    • I have contacted the sofa shop who are sending someone out tomorrow to inspect the furniture. I suspect if anything a replacement will be offered although I would prefer a refund. Few photos of the wear in the material, this is how it was delivered.  
    • Yup, for goodness sake she needs to stop paying right now, DCA's are powerless, as .  Is it showing on their credit file? Best to use Check my file. All of the above advice is excellent, definitely SAR the loan company as soon as possible.
    • Hi all, I am wandering if this is appealable. It has already been through a challenge on the Islington website and the it was rejected. Basically there was a suspended bay sign on a post on Gee st which was obscured by a Pizza van. The suspension was for 3 bays outside 47 Gee st. I parked outside/between 47 & 55 Gee st. I paid via the phone system using a sign a few meters away from my car. When I got back to the car there was a PCN stuck to the windscreen which I had to dry out before I could read it due to rain getting into the plastic sticky holder.  I then appealed using the Islington website which was then rejected the next day. I have attached a pdf of images that I took and also which the parking officer took. There are two spaces in front of the van, one of which had a generator on it the other was a disabled space. I would count those as 3 bays? In the first image circled in red is the parking sign I read. In the 2nd image is the suspension notice obscured by the van. I would have had to stand in the middle of the road to read this, in fact that's where I was standing when I took the photo. I have pasted the appeal and rejection below. Many thanks for looking. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- This is my appeal statement: As you can see from the image attached (image 1) I actually paid £18.50 to park my car in Gee st. I parked the car at what I thought was outside 55 Gee st as seen in image 2 attached. When I read the PCN issued it stated there was a parking suspension. There was no suspension notice on the sign that I used to call the payment service outside number 55 Gee st. I looked for a suspension notice and eventually found one which was obscured by a large van and generator parked outside 47 Gee st. As seen in images 3 and 4 attached. I am guessing the parking suspension was to allow the Van to park and sell Pizza during the Clerkenwell design week. I was not obstructing the use or parking of the van, in fact the van was obstructing the suspension notice which meant I could not read or see it without prior knowledge it was there. I would have had to stand in the road to see it endangering myself as I had to to take images to illustrate the hidden notice. As there was no intention to avoid a parking charge and the fact the sign was not easily visible I would hope this challenge can be accepted. Many thanks.   This is the text from the rejection: Thank you for contacting us about the above Penalty Charge Notice (PCN). The PCN was issued because the vehicle was parked in a suspended bay or space. I note from your correspondence that there was no suspension notice on the sign that you used to call the payment serve outside number 55 Gee Street. I acknowledge your comments, however, your vehicle was parked in a bay which had been suspended. The regulations require the suspension warning to be clearly visible. It is a large bright yellow sign and is erected by the parking bay on the nearest parking plate to the area that is to be suspended. Parking is then not permitted in the bay for any reason or period of time, however brief. The signs relating to this suspension were sited in accordance with the regulations. Upon reviewing the Civil Enforcement Officer's (CEO's) images and notes, I am satisfied that sufficient signage was in place and that it meets statutory requirements. Whilst I note that the signage may have been obstructed by a large van and generator at the time, please note, it is the responsibility of the motorist to locate and check the time plate each time they park. This will ensure that any changes to the status of the bay are noted. I acknowledge that your vehicle possessed a RingGo session at the time, however, this does not authorize parking within a suspended bay. Suspension restrictions are established to facilitate specific activities like filming or construction, therefore, we anticipate the vehicle owner to relocate the vehicle from the suspended area until the specified date and time when the suspension concludes. Leaving a vehicle unattended for any period of time within a suspended bay, effectively renders the vehicle parked in contravention and a Civil Enforcement Officer (CEO) may issue a PCN. Finally, the vehicle was left parked approximately 5 metres away from the closest time plate notice. It is the responsibility of the driver to ensure they park in a suitable parking place and check all signs and road markings prior to leaving their vehicle parked in contravention. It remains the driver's responsibility to ensure that the vehicle is parked legally at all times. With that being said, I would have to inform you, your appeal has been rejected at this stage. Please see the below images as taken by the CEO whilst issuing the PCN: You should now choose one of the following options: Pay the penalty charge. We will accept the discounted amount of £65.00 in settlement of this matter, provided it is received by 10 June 2024. After that date, the full penalty charge of £130.00 will be payable. Or Wait for a Notice to Owner (NtO) to be issued to the registered keeper of the vehicle, who is legally responsible for paying the penalty charge. Any further correspondence received prior to the NtO being issued may not be responded to. The NtO gives the recipient the right to make formal representations against the penalty charge. If we reject those representations, there will be the right of appeal to the Environment and Traffic Adjudicator.   Gee st pdf.pdf
    • Nationwide Building Society has launched an 18 month fixed-rate account paying 5.5%.View the full article
  • 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

My niece needs help please


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3400 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 191
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Could your niece contact the college directly stating she doesn't want to do the course? If they agree then the nursery has no reason to withold the money.

 

I'd also look to speaking to acas & a local solicitor. Sounds very like this lady is acting illegally with deductions & taking advantage of a young girl.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi guys

We have received an e-mail from the employer claiming Susan owes her £1,700 for cost of agency cover for the 6 weeks notice period Susan failed to work. Total was £3,000 less Susan's Hourly rate, less Susan's accrued pay for hours worked prior to resignation, leaves amount payable £1,700, give or take.

 

In order to make it easier for anyone willing to advise, I will enter a * where I would like advice.

 

1) She points out that She had no option but to accept the resignation, as it was left on her desk. I query this , because *she could have shown a little more compassion, as within 6 minutes of Susan leaving the building, she was threatening, making it difficult for Susan to even speak to her again, let alone go back to work, valid point or not, bearing in mind Susan's naivety, which employer would have been well aware of *

 

2) she says Susan is not entitled to SSP, as her sickness started after resignation. Resignation tendered at the end of Susan's shift on Friday, Medical certificate commenced on the Monday. *Could it be argued that, Susan was under emotional pressure when she resigned?*

 

3) points out the fact that Susan agreed to pay agency cover if she left early in signing her contract of employment * Can the employer just sit back for the whole 6 weeks before attempting to find a replacement*

 

4) *Can we ask for proof of this agency cover?*

 

Employer has given Susan until 17th Jan to contact her to arrange a re payment programme or she will commence with legal proceedings. Employer also said she was going on holiday for two weeks, so she's handing it over to nursery manager.

 

Thoughts anyone

Link to post
Share on other sites

One other thing, employer states that the last page of handbook/employment contract states that employer can legally make deductions for monies owed for the cost of replacing you, so the fact you resigned without notice is immaterial?

 

I take that to mean, she can withhold any salary and holiday pay, which is understandable, but it doesn't necessarily mean she can make Susan pay, or Sue her? If that was the case, then employers would in some circumstances not hold people to their notice in favour of getting an agency person in, knowing the cost has to be covered by the ex employee!

 

Just going to check the wording in the contract

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote from employer

The cost of replacing you is detailed in the last page of the Employee handbook and I am therefore legally entitled to deduct the outstanding monies owed to me by having to replace you and the fact that you resigned without notice is immaterial.

 

Quote from handbook

 

If you terminate your employment without giving or working the required notice period, you will have an amount equal to any additional cost of covering your duties during the notice period not worked deducted from any termination pay due to you.

 

In my opinion, it says noting about being able to charge or Sue you for anything over what you have accrued upon resignation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Small claims and Employment Tribunals are supposed to be accessible to ordinary people without a solicitor, hence why legal aid is not available. Its not going to be worth using a solicitor for a dispute of this size. You can always go to the CAB if helpful.

 

There are basically three options. First option is to sit back and hope they don't bring a claim, and defend it if they do. Second option is to go on the offensive. Third option is to try and reach some kind of settlement but it doesn't sound like any decent settlement is currently on the table.

 

In your position I'd be tempted to open an Employment Tribunal claim for the unpaid wages and holiday pay. The purpose of this would be to force part of the dispute to be heard on your terms. Section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 prevents an employer from making deductions unless authorised by statute or in signed writing. A signed employment contract would count but its doubtful whether the employee handbook would count. Similarly a general claim for breach of contract due to not working the notice period would not count. This could force a payment and would put a lot of extra pressure on the employer. The employer cannot make a counterclaim in Employment Tribunal. If it wanted to make a counterclaim it would need to begin a separate claim in county court.

 

If you are feeling cheeky could add in a claim for SSP on top but to be honest I think would be pretty difficult to claim SSP covering the period after her resignation.

 

In any event its probably a good idea to write to the employer stating that (1) the employer accepted an immediate resignation and consequently there was no required notice period; and alternatively (2) the employer has not suffered any loss as it would have needed an agency worker anyway to cover the sickness.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that steampowered, I like clear defined options to choose from, so really grateful for your input.

 

Employer has given Susan until 17th Jan to arrange a re payment programme and then commence legal proceedings.

 

On the plus side employer has passed the matter on to the nursery manager (different branch of same nursery) to deal with as she's going on holiday for two weeks, this is good because this lady is far more approachable, and has actually had reason to speak to some of the other staff members when they were caught gossiping about Susan's depression, although I imagine the way forward ultimately lies with the owner, who has made it clear she wants the money back, end of!

 

I think I may try the ' you would have needed cover for my sickness anyway' option at least if it's written down and it does go to court, it would be harder for the judge to ignore that particular issue.

Also it may be worth reminding the employer that Susan's emotional and vulnerable state was ignored (save for passing her some tissues) during their meeting a few days before resignation, employer knew Susan was emotionally unstable, so why put her under more pressure by saying the new team leader was going to need a lot if support from her! A few days garden leave may have been more appropriate, or at least a minimal amount of compassion. There was absolutely no need for this to have got so out of hand, had the employer taken some responsibility

 

Thanks Steampowered, I shall report back, in the meantime I'll make an appointment with the CAB

Link to post
Share on other sites

If agency staff were brought in to cover for another staff member who was absent, or to cover understaffing then they would have needed to bring in more than one agency staff member, when your niece left they were already one person down (possibly more) so they would have had to bring in a minimum of 2 people.

 

 

if they brought in only one person to cover staff absence or understaffing then the person brought in could not be covering for your niece and another member of staff or the fact that they were understaffed.

 

 

If they brought in 2 or more then they could justify that they were covering for your niece so you need to establish if they actually brought in agency staff, and if so how many.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure employer will be forthcoming with that information, unless directed to do so by a court, but I will compose a letter this week, and that will be requested.

 

My niece has been told, both nurseries owned by this woman have had several complaints, one having Police attendance, and the nursery my niece was at, is having an emergency Ofstead report done in the next 30 days, because of the complaints, it's only hearsay, but seems as if Susan was absolutely right in her concerns, not that I doubted her for a second anyway.

 

Thanks, I am so grateful for this help, it's quite stressful trying to keep Susan positive, without giving her too much hope that this won't ultimately end up in court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

She's already in trouble by the sounds of it, being inspected due to complaints. I would rather leave it until after this is over.

I have spent all evening composing a letter, I keep reading and re reading it back, because sometimes it sounds a bit accusing, but all I'm doing is stating the truth.

 

I have asked the following

For proof of the agency costs, and anything to show she's tried to find permenant cover during the 6 weeks.

To point out the part in the employment contract which says an employee can be held liable for cover (all I can find is that she can deduct from salary/holiday)

 

I have asked her to take some responsibility for her part in Susan's sickness, and to pay the holiday/salary due.

I have stated that there has been a breech of confidentiality regarding Susan's medical certificate.

I have stated that she would have needed cover anyway to cover the period of sickness.

I have pointed out how she hasn't asked why Susan left, which indicates she knew she was struggling, and did nothing about it, except make it worse.

 

Told her Susan will defend the case and submit a counterclaim, if she starts legal proceedings

 

Question

Can you counterclaim for damages in a county court?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Question

Can you counterclaim for damages in a county courtlink3.gif?

 

Yes you can raise a breach of contract counterclaim (i.e. unpaid wages). You can't raise many other employment rights (e.g. unfair dismissal) but she doesn't have the necessary 2 years service for unfair dismissal anyway.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking along the lines of compensation for the stress caused, and the costs for time spent responding to her threats and researching. Don't think the wages issue would hold up, as it does clearly state in contract employer can deduct from wages/ holiday any losses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking along the lines of compensation for the stress caused, and the costs for time spent responding to her threats and researching. Don't think the wages issue would hold up, as it does clearly state in contract employer can deduct from wages/ holiday any losses.

 

The court won't entertain a counterclaim along those lines I'm afraid. You can't claim for general stress. If you win the case in theory it is possible to claim £18 an hour for time spent working on the case but very unlikely any costs would be awarded in small claims track (this track applicable to cases worth less than 10k).

 

The employment contract has to be signed before deductions are permitted.

 

The strongest card might be the fact that agency staff would have been required anyway due to the illness, and the burden of proof would be on your daughter to prove that the illness was genuine and significant. Although I don't have a clear grasp of all the details I also think the fact that it seems the employer accepted the immediate resignation is a strong card.

 

If you can point to some sort of breach of contract by the employer that may justify a constructive-dismissal type situation (the reasoning is that if they are in fundamental breach of contract your daughter was entitled to bring the employment contract to an end) but I don't see anything concrete on this from your posts so far.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all

Company handbook in addition to one piece of A4 paper headed, Statement of main terms of employment, and signed by Susan.

There is a further A4 piece of paper, again signed by Susan headed, Deductions from pay.

 

Main statement doesn't say anything about recovering costs or deductions, but Handbook and and deductions from pay sheet both say the following:

 

If you terminate your employment without giving or working the required period of notice, as indicated in your individual statement of main terms of employment, you will have an amount equal to any additional cost of covering your duties during the notice period not worked deducted from any termination pay due to you. You will also forfeit any contractual accrued holiday pay due to you over and above your statutory holiday pay, if you fail to give or work the required period of notice.

 

I'm no expert, but that doesn't say to me that employer can sue for agency cover.

Thoughts anyone?

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the contrary, I think that is exactly what this is - agency!

 

"you will have an amount equal to any additional cost of covering your duties during the notice period not worked deducted from any termination pay due to you"

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

I think this is a bit of a red herring to be honest. Although I think you are correct that the clause mentioned in your post only covers deductions and does not cover claims, I do not think they need to have a specific clause in the employment contract to bring a claim against her in the county court.

 

Leaving before the end of a contractually agreed notice period is breach of contract. If a contract has been breached the employer can make a breach of contract claim to compensate it for any loss it has suffered.

 

The relevance of having the clause in there is that the Employment Rights Act requires a signed contract before the employer can make wage deductions, but the Act says nothing about needing a specific clause to bring a breach of contract claim.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...