Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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
      • 160 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

Advice regarding this..


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3604 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

Its hard to word this correctly so i apologise it all sounds a bit back and forth / repeated.

I work for a security firm, for the last few years its just been self employed, everyone does their own tax etc at the year end. We however dont invoice the security company who "employ" us, we are contracted to them, but we get paid from another company (Amber pay).

 

There recently was the budget released making changes to the uk etc, and now we have been told that under new legislation, we have to sign new contracts saying amber pay are going to pay our tax and national insurance - yet we can still claim back on expenses. It seems they are trying to take the best of both worlds of PAYE and self employed - paye for tax and NI purposes, self employed for not having to pay holiday and sick pay and other benefits?

 

Apparently people in the same industry havnt heard much about this, but to me it sounds like something isnt quite right? For example DJ's to a nightclub are contractors, they get paid as normal and are self employed, the club isnt in charge of paying their tax and national insurance, yet we are contractors for security and are being told the company paying us now has to pay our tax and ni, but we are still self employed?

 

Sounds a bit like an umbrella company type of thing? Surely we should have the option to go either PAYE or Self employed, not a mixture of both?

 

Its a bit of a pickle.. I fill in everyones hours worked, they get faxed off to the security office, who then pass the hours on to amber pay, who then pay us.. Any help? :/

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do they state what the new legislation is?

 

 

There's info here on employment status http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/employment-status/

 

 

If this doesn't clear it up you could try a call to HMRC for clarification.

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

Apparently the legislation was something to do with being self employed but mostly working at the same place for the same person which sometimes can be classed as an employee - however no one is on a contract, they can have time off whenever they wish etc etc, so there are elements of both..

 

But it has come to light that we can just invoice the original company instead of going through amber pay which kind of contradicts everything again?!

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Just been through all this and it's easier and more beneficial to start as a limited company, (even on just a personal level) than stay as self employed or PAYE. Look for a good accountant and not one that wants to sign you up for VAT or still take CIS Tax!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just been through all this and it's easier and more beneficial to start as a limited company, (even on just a personal level) than stay as self employed or PAYE. Look for a good accountant and not one that wants to sign you up for VAT or still take CIS Tax!

 

CIS is the Construction Industry Scheme. There are circumstances where HMRC don't allow contractors to opt out of it but the OP works in security so CIS shouldn't come into it.

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

CIS is the Construction Industry Scheme. There are circumstances where HMRC don't allow contractors to opt out of it but the OP works in security so CIS shouldn't come into it.

 

 

 

It's still the same issue as the CIS scheme is changing and you can't claim as self employed as previous and being paid through an umbrella company. The same thing would apply to the OP. As they have said it's hard to describe and complicated unless you are in the situation and understand what's happening. It's across the board so it doesn't matter if the OP is SIA or CIS. The purpose is to stop false self employment claims through agencies and try to move workers to PAYE where they can be closer tax monitored and regulated.

 

OH works in same place, no contract and self employed. He now invoices the company direct as a Ltd. company and it's made a difference in actual earnings compared to previously and what we can claim back is much higher.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...