Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • they cant 'take away' anything, what ever makes you believe that?  dx  
    • The text on the N1SDT Claim Form 1.The claim is for breaching the terms and conditions set on private land. 2. The defendant's vehicle, NumberPlate, was identified in the Leeds Bradford Airport Roadways on the 28/07/2023 in breach of the advertised terms and conditions; namely Stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited 3.At all material times the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or driver. 4. The terms and conditions upon  entering private land were clearly displayed at the entrance and in prominent locations 5. The sign was the offer and the act of entering private land was the acceptance of the offer hereby entering into a contract by conduct. 6.The signs specifically detail the terms and conditions and the consequences of failure to comply,  namely a parking charge notice will be issued, and the Defendant has failed to settle the outstanding liability. 7.The claimant seeks the recovery of the parking charge notice, contractual costs and interest.   This is what I am thinking of for the wording of my defence The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and are generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 1. Paragraph 1 is denied. It is denied that the Defendant ever entered into a contract to breach any terms and conditions of the stated private land. 2. Paragraph 2 and 4 are denied. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was only contracted to provide car park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. 3. It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of the vehicle. 4.  Paragraph 6 is denied the claimant has yet to evidence that their contract with the landowner supersedes  Leeds Bradford airport byelaws. Further it is denied that the Claimant’s signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract. 5. Paragraph 7 is denied, there are no contractual costs and interest cannot be accrued on a speculative charge.   I'm not sure whether point 4 is correct as I think this side road is not covered by byelaws? Any other suggestions/corrections would be appreciated.
    • Dear EVRi parcelnet LTD t/a evri   evri parcelnet isnt a thing also you say defendant's response which is a bit of a weird format.   Something like   Dear EVRi, Claim no xxxx In your defence you said you could not access tracking. Please see attached receipt and label Regards
    • Welcome to the Forum I have moved your topic to the appropriate forum  Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues Please continue to post here.   Andy
    • Please provide advice on the following situation: I rented out my property to four students for 16 months until March 2024. Initially, the property was in very good condition, but now it needs extensive renovation. This includes redoing the bathroom, replacing the kitchen, removing wallpaper, and redecorating due to significant mould growth. The tenants also left their furniture on the grass, which is owned by the local authority. As a landlord, I've met all legal requirements. It seems the damage was caused by poor ventilation—windows were always closed, and heating wasn't used. There was also a bathroom leak fixed by reapplying silicone. I tried to claim insurance, but it was denied, citing tenant behaviour as the cause by looking at the photos, which isn't covered. The deposit barely covers the repair costs, or else I'll have to pursue money claims, which I've never done before and am unsure about its legal complications or costs. Any thoughts on this?
  • 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

is this right?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3335 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

to cut a long story short.....after many complaints to external management about working conditions i decided enough was enough and handed my notice in, i asked my manager what holiday entitlement i had and was told 22 days, it is not possible to view your own record on the system we had or amend it, things deteriorated and i eventually walked out. In a nutshell i was regularly working in excess of 60 hours whilst being paid for 48.

 

i then get a zero payslip stating that the holiday that the system showed was incorrect and i had 1 days holiday..

 

i asked them formally for a record of all holidays taken and hours worked in those weeks and got the vaguest reply without all this information, i also should have been given TOIL for bank holidays which they admitted hadn't been given so they are crediting the cash value against the overpayment they made to me.

 

I also asked how they would recompense me for additional hours worked over and above my normal hours and they stated that my contract contains an opt out of the WTD and that i should have opted in to this if i didn't want to work over 48 hours. this doesn't answer my question on the company policy into how these hours should be compensated for, i have an email from my manager stating that she required me to work up to 55 hours a week and she would help me to write rosters that meant i didn't need to, she never did help me.

 

so my query is really............

 

do i have to opt in to the working time directive?

are they required to pay me for all hours worked over and above the 48 contracted for?

can they recover overpayments from me if i dispute that i owe it?

do they have to provide all the information i am requesting and can i do anything if i dispute the amount of holiday taken using my own records?

 

thanks for any help

Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Yes, you need to give them notice you are opting back in. They cannot refuse it2. Not unless your contract says so, or not to do so would take you below NMW3. Yes4. If you issue an SAR, yes, if it exists!

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

1. Yes, you need to give them notice you are opting back in. They cannot refuse it2. Not unless your contract says so, or not to do so would take you below NMW3. Yes4. If you issue an SAR, yes, if it exists!

Thanks for this but....Can a contract of employment contain an automatic opt out of the working time directive.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you where contracted to 48 hours and regularly worked more whilst the employer is not required to pay you the overtime they should give you the time worked over back in liew.

 

Where I work unless overtime is formally sanctioned I will not be paid for it, however, I can take this time back if agreed. ( There's the catch) If you worked above the contracted hours and did not get formal agreement that they would A pay you B you take the time back. they could say you did it off your own back and stick two fingers up at you. I got stung with that one :mad2:

 

Bill

All information given above is purely my own opinion. Some based on personal experience. Where backed up by case files I will make that known. However, until then please take all of what I say with a pinch of salt and accept it only as a reference. :madgrin::madgrin::madgrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you where contracted to 48 hours and regularly worked more whilst the employer is not required to pay you the overtime they should give you the time worked over back in liew.

 

Bill

 

Should, but importantly are not legally obliged to unless you contract says so, or you are under NMW with the extra hours. And probably you also need to have got the overtime pre-authorised.

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

Should, but importantly are not legally obliged to unless you contract says so, or you are under NMW with the extra hours. And probably you also need to have got the overtime pre-authorised.

The manager loaded the rosters onto the time and attendance system so was well aware of the hours I was rostered to do..

Link to post
Share on other sites

a) what did your contract say about overtimeb) do the hours take you below NMW

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

Contract, not policy is what matters most....

 

I agree totally with your statement. However surely if it was the manager doing the rosters and putting more hours on, then they should be required to pay the additional hours under those circumstances? I can't see the contract saying you will be required to work regular overtime but without pay and no time back in leiu.

 

Bill

All information given above is purely my own opinion. Some based on personal experience. Where backed up by case files I will make that known. However, until then please take all of what I say with a pinch of salt and accept it only as a reference. :madgrin::madgrin::madgrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not necessarily Bill.... eg if the contract says "hours required to do the job". So we need to know the exact wording.

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

Added a line to last post. and agreed unless the exact wording of the contract is known we are at a stop sign.

All information given above is purely my own opinion. Some based on personal experience. Where backed up by case files I will make that known. However, until then please take all of what I say with a pinch of salt and accept it only as a reference. :madgrin::madgrin::madgrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Added a line to last post. and agreed unless the exact wording of the contract is known we are at a stop sign.

Hi everyone thankyou for taking the time to reply, I'm currently waiting again for the company to send me copies of the documents, they seem rather reticent to send me anything other than a letter stating they will be writing to me from another department to recover an overpayment, but I can't substantiate an over payment as they won't send me details on how they've based the overpayment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...