Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • It sounds as if they need better algorithms or another way to check. DWP algorithm wrongly flags 200,000 people for possible fraud and error | Housing benefit | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Exclusive: Two-thirds of housing benefit claims marked as high risk in last three years were legitimate, figures show  
    • I'm afraid that both yourself and we will need to see the claim form as a basic minimum. As this person has issued proceedings, we can't go any further at all without understanding the detail of what they are claiming on the basis of the claim. When you receive a claim form then you might normally respond within 14 days either with a defence or an acknowledgement of service. If you don't respond with either of these then the claimant can go ahead and obtain a judgement against you in default and that then becomes a bit tricky and also a bit expensive to overturn – called "a set-aside" If you don't file a defence but you supply an acknowledgement, then you get a further 14 days so up to 28 days to file a defence. I understand that you have had difficulties accessing the claim form. I'm afraid I don't know why that is not sure how much help we can give you on that. You're going to have to do this is a matter of urgency whatever the runs are rights of your position are. Once we understand the claim form, then we can advise you as to the next step and also we can put the claim in the context of your own story and decide how best to defend. I'm at a bit of the lost to give any more constructive advice at this point. Access to the claim form is essential. You could telephone the County Court business centre which I think is in Northampton. They have a helpline and maybe they can give you some solutions – but in the meantime, why can't you access the password reset? Have you checked your spam folder?
    • Thanks very much BankFodder, your help is invaluable and I will read through it more carefully this evening.  At this time I am not aware of any information I have left out. And thanks to jk2054, I realised after sending it about the third party rights, you are absolutely correct and I will proceed as standard BOC claim. I'll come back with any questions once I've had a thorough re-read and so I hope to get the letter emailed and posted early this week so I can start the 14 day clock. Thanks again, M
    • The original LOC is wrong. You are nothing to do with third party rights.   you placed the order on EVRi's website so there is no third party rights in it, its a standard BOC claim
    • nike pre provide the labels arguably here the easiest target is nike because they will give in very easily.  
  • 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

Misuse of company equipment, breaching policies


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3710 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

Hi guys,

 

Bit of background:

 

I'm just shy of two years with my employer, I always prioritise my work and in the beginning, when the workload was really high, I would often stay back for hours and come in at the weekend to help out without being asked and without being paid. I have a strong work ethic.

 

The issue:

 

My manager, whom I've raised a grievance against for various reasons, reported me to HR for carrying out non-work related activity whilst at work which is true.

 

Why did I do it if I have a strong work ethic?

 

Various people on the team including myself have brought to our manager's attention that there are many hours every day with no work to do. He hasn't escalated this to anyone and he has allowed everyone on the team to browse the internet, complete coursework and sit on Facebook etc. for many months. I refuse to sit and do nothing for hours every day so I choose to educate myself by completing coursework.

 

What's happened?

 

I had an investigation which I know is going to progress to a disciplinary based on the questions and the fact that I once (or twice) printed something off using work's printers. This probably cost the company 10p and considering the additional hours of work I've put in I would say that they could let that slide but they won't of course. Every time I gave a reasonable explanation for my actions, the investigator explained it away and asked me leading questions to force me to look bad such as 'do you think it is reasonable of an employer who is paying you to expect you to talk with your team as part of a team bonding exercise rather than use company equipment (PC) to complete coursework'. This question is ridiculous and I tried to point this out in the most diplomatic way possible; if my employer is happy to pay me to sit and gossip for hours, or sit and stare into space for hours then why would it matter if I sit and do coursework?

 

I feel as though I am being punished for choosing to educate myself rather than sit and chat...which we're actually not allowed to do because our manager tells us off for it regularly (i.e. after a couple of minutes, never mind hours!)

 

The advice I need is this:

 

If an employee tells their line manager and one of the owners of the company that they do not have any work to do for lengthy periods of time every day (proving they want to work!), can the employer punish me for browsing the web etc. especially when everyone else on the team does it and the manager has known for months?

 

This company has standard policies about web usage but our manager has set the precedent by allowing it for so long.

 

The example they gave of 'sit and chat' is ridiculous because that would be worse and here's why:

 

The investigator had been given (false) information that on a particular shift I had not dealt with a user effectively as a result of doing my coursework. This was inaccurate, I had actually put more effort into trying to get it resolved than any of my colleagues would have, it just happens that I missed what the issue was. There was only one other colleague working that day and we'd had a falling out. Clearly he has lied about me. Yet, this same colleague kept leaving his desk to go and chat with people and actually packed up all of his things 40 minutes before the end of his shift and went to have a gossip with some staff. I completed more than twice the amount of work that he did on that shift. By being away from his desk, he wasn't available to take calls and wasn't available to deal with any issues yet I was because I was staring at my screen writing up an essay.

 

So, who was the more productive employee that day?

 

What employer would really prefer an employee to sit and chat, over educating themselves?

 

I'm shortly speaking to Citizens Advice as I cannot believe that there is any legal justification for refusing to give someone work to do for so many hours but then complain when they read...or type an essay. Especially when the alternative that they suggest is actually worse.

 

I'd also like to point out that when my manager was told about others doing similar things, he did nothing about it. Doesn't my employer have a responsibility to treat me equally and fairly?

 

If anyone has any comments or suggestions, I'd appreciate them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Hi,

 

Having worked as a union rep I am fairly confident about defending employees' rights including my own. Any issues and I typically post a thread on a forum such as this one and speak with a legal advisor in addition to using my own knowledge.

 

My employer has access to evidence which proves my colleagues have all done the same thing (some still are which is infuriating) and I know everyone in the company does too.

 

I don't want to work here anyway and indeed always intended to leave this year (albeit at the end of July) so I've chosen to resign instead of accepting their settlement agreement.

 

The terms of the agreement were a joke and I'm fortunate enough to be able to afford to have principles so if they choose to fire me during my notice period for something my males colleagues have done and are still doing, I will sue them

 

I won't sue for money though (other than my notice pay and any costs) so if they think the time, money and humiliation for them is worth it then so be it.

 

It's a shame but I plan to take a couple of years off work and then be self employed so I'm not too concerned but I will fight for the principal of it. Always.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No idea why you are posting if

a) you won't answer questions and

b) you already know what you are going to do

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

No idea why you are posting if

a) you won't answer questions and

b) you already know what you are going to do

 

Erm, thank you for the "helpful"reply but as you'll note, it's been a long time since I posted and no-one offered any advice so obviously I've decided what I'm going to do now... I didn't know before and why wouldn't I get advice? No harm in getting as much info as possible. Not sure what question I haven't answered but thank you again for posting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What was the outcome of your hearing, or are you now doing 'coursework' at home?:???:

 

I see no answer to this.

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 see no answer to this.

 

Probably because you didn't read my post thoroughly enough. Have another read. There has not yet been a hearing.

 

If you don't have any advice then please stop posting on my thread, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably because you didn't read my post thoroughly enough. Have another read. There has not yet been a hearing.

 

If you don't have any advice then please stop posting on my thread, thank you.

 

Things may well have moved on in the intervening weeks, and what are you doing about coursework now?

 

And I can't see any questions from you seeing advice; you're just telling us what you have already decided?

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...