Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks Dave, greatly appreciated!   Working on the SAR right now.   I've attached my images in a PDF NCP.pdf 
    • The questionable service from the surgery you mention TJ could do with their methods being passed onto the Care Quality Commission and PALS.    Watching Panorama this week the shared ownership scheme needs a serious review to ensure the system helps people not hinder. There must also be developments in the shared ownership scheme with unsafe cladding compounding the terrible financial situation the developers and landlords have put people in.   From the Grenfell enquiry, to me the cladding was mis sold as being entirely inflammable and wondered if the process of fitting the cladding, the council also had the responsibility of conducting their own fire tests. In addition to those thoughts, I'm sure the fire service and resident associations made it clear over time for Grenfell and other developments in the UK buildings did not comply to stringent fire and safety regulations.
    • Good morning.    I would like some advice please.    I recently (19th nov) bought a Samsung Galaxy S20+ from currys. I did open and set up the phone to try it out but 1) wasn’t keen on it and 2) had trouble with the usb connection when trying to connect with my car stereo.   I decided that I would seek to return it, but only on trying to return it came across the stipulation that if data/software has been installed then a refund would not be issued and after calling was told this was due to GDPR. I did point out to them that phone providers will issue full refunds even if the phone has been set-up and also that in order to be able to test the phone it requires setting up and software/data being installed but was told that it’s their policy.   I acknowledge that I may have handled it more than is reasonable in a shop as you wouldn’t be able to install software in a store, however the phone did need to be set up in order to test it, the phone has been returned back to factory settings and didn’t leave a case or the plastic film for the two days I used it for. Therefore I do not believe it was handled more than necessary.   Having looked at the CCR and CRA I called back to state that their store policy is super erred by the previously mentioned regulations and that their policy contradicts the Consumer Regulations Act.   As you cannot properly test the phone without having to install software on it, their policy creates an unfair term which I told the customer service agent over the phone who spoke to her manager and told me to contact their legal department.   I am still within the 14 day notice of return period so wish to try and preferable use this route.   Any advice at all please?
    • Here is all the details (hopefully) in one post.   The Ford Kuga was purchased from Fast Motor Finance LTD Crawley on 8th September 20 Mileage at purchase was 109520 through HP fiancé via Advance Finance Grimsby   The car was covered by a 6 month warranty that includes engine & gearbox but excludes clutches, flywheels or any wear & tear (Taken from the garages website)    Service History:   08-04-2013 Pre-delivery Inspection 26-11-2013 12809 Service (no paperwork just stamped book) 09-07-2014 25963 Service (no paperwork just stamped book) 09-02-2015 36814 Service (first Invoiced service but no paperwork just stamped book). Gearbox service would of probably been done here but can't verify. 16-02-2016 50385 Service  (Full service, paperwork and stamped book) 31-03-2017 64680 Service (Full Service, paperwork & stamped book) 13-02-2018 76988 Service ( Full service with gearbox service, paperwork & book stamp) 29-03-2019 92592 Service (Full service with paperwork & book stamp) 11-02-2020 106322 Service (Basic Service, no paperwork but book stamp)   As there was no paperwork for last service the garage which serviced the car were able to email over that the service was a basic oil & water change and that the gearbox oil and filters was not changed.   At the beginning of November the gearbox started making some noise and was having trouble selecting gear.   The finance company  asked for the car to be taken to a VAT registered garage to find out what the problem was and not to drive it further.   After the garage looked at the car the estimate was for a full service of the gearbox which would be £370 but because it had gone over Ford recommended mileage for the gearbox there would be no guarantee this would clear the problem and that would mean a replacement gearbox would be needed.   Since picking the car up in September the car has driven 1500 miles.   Spoke to the garage as was informed that the car was over 30 days old and there was nothing they could do and the gearbox would not be covered by the warranty as this would be normal wear and tear!   The warranty company said exactly the same and would not entertain us.   After countless calls and emails to Advantage finance a formal complaint was raised and they finally agreed to send one of their mechanics to inspect the car last week 19th November. The mechanics ahs reported back to Advantage that the noise is down to wear and tear and Advantage have closed the complaint and are sending out a deadlock letter that includes a copy of the mechanics report.   Would their mechanic have to be DEKRA registered to complete the report or Advance Finance own mechanic?   This now means that the car cannot be driven is still at the garage and will need a minimum of £370 to make it driveable on a car that has been driven 1500 miles since collection without a guarantee that this will cure the problem.   We are both key workers that need the car to travel to and from work as well as take our son to nursery, and at the moment having to rely of friends and family to help out with lifts.   I have spoken to Ford and they have told me these car need to have the gearbox serviced at around 35k and at a very maximum of 37.5k and have put this on letterheaded paper, I have also emailed a couple of other Ford and independent dealers to get details of this as well.   Would it be worth getting an AA or RAC inspection done to check the gearbox and to see if there is any other problems with the car.   Thanks again to everyone epically dx & Bank fodder who have helped me with advice.   JJ    
    • nothing they can do anyway so..   dx
  • Our picks

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2498 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

I'm hoping someone can assist. My husband, last august, whilst at work, made a mistake on a work order card. He mentioned working at heights, instead of confined spaces. Due to the nature of the work, there was never any danger to people or equipment due to this mistake. As a result, someone higher up the ranking, threw a wobbler, and stated they didn't want him in site, and he was to get off site in 3 weeks time. No investigation, no disciplinary, just told to go home on garden leave, effective in 3 weeks time.

 

He has now been at home since September 2013. Full pay, he has asked if he is required on any other site, no, he has asked is there any training he can do, there may be, but nothing immediate. Now we see his job has been advertised, same job, same location everything.

 

Poor fella is going brain dead. It's ok taking the wage each month for doing nothing, but potentially, he is losing the skills and knowledge he did have, he is bored, his moral is low,

 

Are companies allowed to send you home on garden leave, without any investigations or disciplinary, and leave you there for 5 months, then re advertise your job? Where should be go from here?

Any advice I give, is given with the best intention of helping. I am not legally trained, so it is probably best to just ignore me;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as they are paying they are not legally obliged to provide work.

How long has he worked there please?

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

He worked for the 23.5 months when he went in garden leave, now it's about 27 months, on a full time permanent contract. In addition to this, he studied for a hnc which they paid for, and was completed last May. When they paid for it, they asked him to sign a learning contract which states if he left their employment within. 2 years of completing the course, he would pay the cost of the course back to them, and they also guaranteed to keep him employed for 2years from completion of the course. So he has a full time permanent contract, and the learning contract

Any advice I give, is given with the best intention of helping. I am not legally trained, so it is probably best to just ignore me;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

So he hits the magic 2 years for employment rights.

 

They would need to take him through a formal procedure to dismiss.

 

The contract sounds odd to me; guaranteed to employ for 2 years? With no caveats? Can we have the exact wording please?

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 he hits the magic 2 years for employment rights.

 

They would need to take him through a formal procedure to dismiss.

 

The contract sounds odd to me; guaranteed to employ for 2 years? With no caveats? Can we have the exact wording please?

 

Yes, definitely over 2 years employment. I think they would struggle to dismiss him over it now with no investigation or disciplinary in the 5 months since the event, plus I didn't think it could be classed as gross misconduct as they allowed him to work on site for an additional 3 weeks after the incident. He has a clear record as far as disciplinarians are concerned, and all his personal development reviews have been above target.

 

We spoke to acas, who said he was allowed to be on garden leave for a reasonable amount of time, but couldn't define what reasonable was. It doesn't look like they want him back there if they are advertising the same job

 

I'll ask him if eh has a copy of the learning contract at home

Any advice I give, is given with the best intention of helping. I am not legally trained, so it is probably best to just ignore me;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a most odd situation!

 

I assume he is not in a union?

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

Yes, unite. He was reluctant to contact them before now, for fear of being branded a trouble maker, but I think we have left it long enough, and need to call them on Monday

Any advice I give, is given with the best intention of helping. I am not legally trained, so it is probably best to just ignore me;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be hoping a rep could broker a conversation between him and his employer.

 

You do need to be aware this may bring things to a head and the outcome may not be what you would wish.

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

This is the confusion. Could they still sack him for gross misconduct?

Any advice I give, is given with the best intention of helping. I am not legally trained, so it is probably best to just ignore me;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

If what he did was GMC, yes. Depends on the relative views of the incident - he says not dangerous, they say not following procedure, etc.

 

Seems unlikely but a possibility.

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

Ok thanks

Any advice I give, is given with the best intention of helping. I am not legally trained, so it is probably best to just ignore me;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
If what he did was GMC, yes. Depends on the relative views of the incident - he says not dangerous, they say not following procedure, etc.

 

Seems unlikely but a possibility.

 

Surely if it was GMC he wouldn't have been allowed to work for 3 weeks, especially if safety was an issue. Procedures are obviously important so I can understand there being an issue if it was wrong (I'm not saying it was or wasn't), but as has been said this seems odd and I'm trying to see the logic.

 

What's Best for You?

 

 

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

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

 

Alliance & Leicester Moneyclaim issued 20/1/07 £225.50 full settlement received 29 January 2007

Smile £1,075.50 + interest Email request for payment 24/5/06 received £1,000.50 14/7/06 + £20 30/7/06

Yorkshire Bank Moneyclaim issued 21/6/06 £4,489.39 full settlement received 26 January 2007

:p

 

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

On site, if anything has been done, or not done according to procedure, then a report known as a critical risk is logged. This could be anything from someone spilling something, and not barrier-ing it off, and getting it cleaned up, to someone who doesn't have security clearance not being escorted (even to go to the toilet), to someone not following procedure, using the wrong tools/equipment. In the instance with my husband and the work order card, no CR was raised, which I presume means there was no risk deemed.

 

Due to their being no CR raised, no investigation, no disciplinary, I personally think they would struggle with the GMC route at this late stage. It's doesn't mean they won't try, but we can prove they haven't followed their own every day procedures, and disciplinary procedures. Yes, he was allowed to work on site for another 3 weeks, before going on garden leave. He was given 3 weeks notice, basically told, as from 13th September, you are not wanted on site.

 

He was them told that a training package would be put together, authorised by site, and once the additional training was done, he would be allowed back on site

 

At the end of October, he was told by head office that they were waiting to the guy who initially threw a wobbler, to authorise the training package that had been out together. As far as we know, they are still waiting for that authorisation.

 

In December, he received a letter thanking him for his hard work this year, and awarding him a pay rise! (This happens every December)

 

At the beginning of January, we saw the same job being advertised on the internet. Husband rang his manager on site, who said that he should receive a phone call in the next couple of weeks, and he would be back on site then. That was 3 weeks ago - still waiting for a phone call. He questioned if he still needed the training package, to be told no, he didn't.

 

I personally didn't think they could go for Gmc, for the reasons given above. I thought they may make him redundant, but this is a multi national company, with hundreds of employees in the same job role as he is, at many sites all over the world. Redundancy procedure would be costly and time consuming

 

I then thought they may simply end his contract and pay him his notice period, saying there was no linger a requirement for his role on site, then if saw it being advertised.

Any advice I give, is given with the best intention of helping. I am not legally trained, so it is probably best to just ignore me;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Surely if it was GMC he wouldn't have been allowed to work for 3 weeks, especially if safety was an issue. Procedures are obviously important so I can understand there being an issue if it was wrong (I'm not saying it was or wasn't), but as has been said this seems odd and I'm trying to see the logic.

 

1. never say never, we don't have investigation notes

2. you would start investigating with the possibility of GMC and maybe downgrade

 

but as I said, seems unlikely.

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

If there was an investigation, at no time was my husband questioned/interviewed or invited to attend an investigation meeting

Any advice I give, is given with the best intention of helping. I am not legally trained, so it is probably best to just ignore me;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Keep a copy of the job advert. It is proof that the job is still there.

 

I have saved it. Redundancy was a concern I had about the path they might take, but can't now because of the job advert. Thanks for the replies think we will speak to union on Monday and then see what happens

Any advice I give, is given with the best intention of helping. I am not legally trained, so it is probably best to just ignore me;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've read through the OP several times and I don't want to put a spanner in the works as I am making a few assumptions here.

 

 

1. Is he a contractor on a site?

2. Is there anywhere else he could work if his company relocated him? I see he has asked but what was the response?

 

 

The reason I ask is because I have been in the situation where we had an employee working on a contract, but the site manager removed security clearance as he believed the person to be a risk. After following procedures, and having nowhere else to locate the employee we had to dismiss on SOSR.

 

 

Now the above example is deliberately brief and vague to be safe, but a potentially fair dismissal doesn't have to be GM. Having said that, I just don't understand what the employer is doing by leaving an employee at home for so long.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...