Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • S13 (2)The creditor may not exercise the right under paragraph 4 to recover from the keeper any unpaid parking charges specified in the notice to keeper if, within the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which that notice was given, the creditor is given— (a)a statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement; (b)a copy of the hire agreement; and (c)a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement. As  Arval has complied with the above they cannot be pursued by EC----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S14 [1]   the creditor may recover those charges (so far as they remain unpaid) from the hirer. (2)The conditions are that— (a)the creditor has within the relevant period given the hirer a notice in accordance with sub-paragraph (5) (a “notice to hirer”), together with a copy of the documents mentioned in paragraph 13(2) and the notice to keeper; (b)a period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the notice to hirer was given has elapsed;  As ECP did not send copies of the documents to your company and they have given 28 days instead of 21 days they have failed to comply with  the Act so you and your Company are absolved from paying. That is not to say that they won't continue asking to be paid as they do not have the faintest idea how PoFA works. 
    • Euro have got a lot wrong and have failed to comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4.  According to Section 13 after ECP have written to Arval they should then send a NTH to the Hirer  which they have done.This eliminates Arval from any further pursuit by ECP. When they wrote to your company they should have sent copies of everything that they asked Arval for. This is to prove that your company agree what happened on the day of the breach. If ECP then comply with the Act they are allowed to pursue the hirer. If they fail, to comply they cannot make the hirer pay. They can pursue until they are blue in the face but the Hirer is not lawfully required to pay them and if it went to Court ECP would lose. Your company could say who was driving but the only person that can be pursued is the Hirer, there does not appear to be an extension for a driver to be pursued. Even if there was, because ECP have failed miserably to comply with the Act  they still have no chance of winning in Court. Here are the relevant Hire sections from the Act below.
    • Thank-you FTMDave for your feedback. May I take this opportunity to say that after reading numerous threads to which you are a contributor, I have great admiration for you. You really do go above and beyond in your efforts to help other people. The time you put in to help, in particular with witness statements is incredible. I am also impressed by the way in which you will defer to others with more experience should there be a particular point that you are not 100% clear on and return with answers or advice that you have sought. I wish I had the ability to help others as you do. There is another forum expert that I must also thank for his time and patience answering my questions and allowing me to come to a “penny drops” moment on one particular issue. I believe he has helped me immensely to understand and to strengthen my own case. I shall not mention who it is here at the moment just in case he would rather I didn't but I greatly appreciate the time he took working through that issue with me. I spent 20+ years of working in an industry that rules and regulations had to be strictly adhered to, indeed, exams had to be taken in order that one had to become qualified in those rules and regulations in order to carry out the duties of the post. In a way, such things as PoFA 2012 are rules and regulations that are not completely alien to me. It has been very enjoyable for me to learn these regulations and the law surrounding them. I wish I had found this forum years ago. I admit that perhaps I had been too keen to express my opinions given that I am still in the learning process. After a suitable period in this industry I became Qualified to teach the rules and regulations and I always said to those I taught that there is no such thing as a stupid question. If opinions, theories and observations are put forward, discussion can take place and as long as the result is that the student is able to clearly see where they went wrong and got to that moment where the penny drops then that is a valuable learning experience. No matter how experienced one is, there is always something to learn and if I did not know the answer to a question, I would say, I don't know the answer to that question but I will go and find out what the answer is. In any posts I have made, I have stated, “unless I am wrong” or “as far as I can see” awaiting a response telling me what I got wrong, if it was wrong. If I am wrong I am only too happy to admit it and take it as a valuable learning experience. I take the point that perhaps I should not post on other peoples threads and I shall refrain from doing so going forward. 🤐 As alluded to, circumstances can change, FTMDave made the following point that it had been boasted that no Caggers, over two years, who had sent a PPC the wrong registration snotty letter, had even been taken to court, let alone lost a court hearing .... but now they have. I too used the word "seemed" because it is true, we haven't had all the details. After perusing this forum I believe certain advice changed here after the Beavis case, I could be wrong but that is what I seem to remember reading. Could it be that after winning the above case in question, a claimant could refer back to this case and claim that a defendant had not made use of the appeal process, therefore allowing the claimant to win? Again, in this instance only, I do not know what is to be gained by not making an appeal or concealing the identity of the driver, especially if it is later admitted that the defendant was the driver and was the one to input the incorrect VRN in error. So far no one has educated me as to the reason why. But, of course, when making an appeal, it should be worded carefully so that an error in the appeal process cannot be referred back to. I thought long and hard about whether or not to post here but I wanted to bring up this point for discussion. Yes, I admit I have limited knowledge, but does that mean I should have kept silent? After I posted that I moved away from this forum slightly to find other avenues to increase my knowledge. I bought a law book and am now following certain lawyers on Youtube in the hope of arming myself with enough ammunition to use in my own case. In one video titled “7 Reasons You Will LOSE Your Court Case (and how to avoid them)” by Black Belt Barrister I believe he makes my point by saying the following, and I quote: “If you ignore the complaint in the first instance and it does eventually end up in court then it's going to look bad that you didn't co-operate in the first place. The court is not going to look kindly on you simply ignoring the company and not, let's say, availing yourself of any kind of appeal opportunities, particularly if we are talking about parking charge notices and things like that.” This point makes me think that, it is not such a bizarre judgement in the end. Only in the case of having proof of payment and inputting an incorrect VRN .... could it be worthwhile making a carefully worded appeal in the first instance? .... If the appeal fails, depending on the reason, surely this could only help if it went to court? As always, any feedback gratefully received.
    • To which official body does one make a formal complaint about a LPA fixed charge receiver? Does one make a complaint first to the company employing the appointed individuals?    Or can one complain immediately to an official body, such as nara?    I've tried researching but there doesn't seem a very clear route on how to legally hold them to account for wrongful behaviour.  It seems frustratingly complicated because they are considered to be officers of the court and held in high esteem - and the borrower is deemed liable for their actions.  Yet what does the borrower do when disclosure shows clear evidence of wrong-doing? Does anyone have any pointers please?
    • Steam is still needed in many industries, but much of it is still made with fossil fuels.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

unfairly Sacked due to CRB Check, Company admits fault, what now?


Mfjg2015
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3236 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 all,

I recently gained employment with SKY in a retail store position, part of the application process was to give my consent, to what i thought was basic disclosure (disclosure Scotland)

 

I was sucessful with my job applicatrion and was offered a formal contract of employement, wich i accepted. I had to travel to luton for a 2 week residential induction course, fully paid and my official start date of my employment was 08/06/2015. I was 3 days into my course and on the afternoon of of the 10/06/2015, just before the class of 11 were leaving for lunch i was pulled aside and asked to come into the office. In the office i was summarily dismissed for a couple of convictions that happened in 1993 showing on my CRB, im 40 years old, these happened when i was a foolish 18 year old, i got caught in a stolen car and got 6 months imprisonment for theft and taking vehicle without owners consent.

 

This was the last time i got into any kind of trouble and i like to see myself as a conributing member of sociaty with a family and even a full clean driving license. Ive held previous posts that required a CRB, ive worked for Virgin Media, British Gas and as a load engineer, british gas and Virgin were sales roles, all the Basdic disclosures came back clear.

so i only asume Sky performed a Standard or enhanced disclosure. I tried to explain to the Manager of Sky that i believed it was my right not to disclose this conviction as it was spent for a number of years, i was just dismissed out right and wasnt even given the opurtunity to appeal. Of course i was very upset, i felt humilited, ashamed and has left me in deep financial crisis. I contacted My area manager, i also phoned the HR department voicing my concerns. Sky admitted fault once there legal team looked at it and offered my position back. I told them i didnt want to work for them and refused, as i felt it could harm future prospects of promotion and left doubts in my mind, i wouldnt feel comfortable, i felt ashamed and embarrased that my employers knew and it just wouldnt feel right to work for them.

 

My question is this, my understanding is, is that they broke the law by performing a Standard or enhanced disclosure as its just a retail job and doesnt come under the exempt list according to the rehabilitation act 1974, it also invaded my privacy, and its also left me up the creek with no paddle financially aswel as the emotional impact. It was a long winded requiment process and all in all it was 2 months from applying to starting, during that time i declined other offers of employment as i wanted to work for Sky for ages and was really exited about the job.

 

I contacted ACAS but they cant do anything, does anybody know who i can go to, as i would really like to claim compensation, like ive said, me and my family are really struggling financially at the moment so i cant afford a solicitor, i was only working there for about 3 days so have no rights concerning employment laws, is there anything i can do?

 

Please Help!

 

Thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a link here to Disclosure Scotland for anyone trying to help...

 

https://www.disclosurescotland.co.uk/

Any advice I give is honest and in good faith.:)

If in doubt, you should seek the opinion of a Qualified Professional.

If you can, please donate to this site.

Help keep it up and active, helping people like you.

If you no longer require help, please do what you can to help others

RIP: Rooster-UK - MARTIN3030 - cerberusalert

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, so Disclosure Scotland is a Basic disclosure, ive had a few of these and have always come back clear, so infact i didnt actually give my consent to a Standard or enhanced disclosure as this kind of disclosure is the only one which would show a 22 year old Spent conviction.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What do you mean by want? Sky are a massive multi billion pound company, im just a little man, i would just like to know if i can do anything and how to go about it, can i actually claim compensation and what law have they broken, data protection? human rights, my right to private life, and to be honest i would like as much money as possible, what do you think i could relistcly claim? i dont mean to sound like a money grabber or anything like that, ive just been put in a very nasty position through no fault of my own.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Was this a one time offence and not a peep since? It should have been spent 7 years and six months after you left prison.

 

Not sure you can do much. Have they confirmed IN WRITING you were fired for that conviction? Or just verbally told that and then let go as unwanted? Do you have anything in writing?

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, nothing since, was a wake up call and had enough common sense to learn by it, 22 years later bites me in the rear...lol...

no, i have nothing in writing, but they did offer my job back and im guessing theres plenty of internal coms. didnt take the job back though, would you? lol, would be very insecure there to say the least, promotions,...etc..etc all because they knew something they had no right to know, more i think about it, more im sure they have breached the data protection act.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you realistically have to answer the question above ?, what do you want ?, you are unclear. Even if they have broken a law it and action is taken, it wouldn't benefit you in any way. Maybe you could gain some compensation but not sure it's worth the hassle, remember as a new employee you have hardly any rights anyway, I worked at my last job where something similar happened, a ccj meant an employee was dismissed by the company relented and offered him Job back and everything was fine. Imo you should of accepted the position back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, i suspected there isnt much i can do, sort of makes you wonder why theres laws in the first place, didnt accept job back, because after being humiliated, treated like ****, sort of lost my faith in it, if you know what i mean, never mind, im sure il get over it, cheers for your answers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is

Any compensation would have to be actual financial losses as a direct consequence.

 

The other problem is that you are expected to mitigate your losses as quickly as possible.

 

In which case, they offered your job back which means loss of employment would be much harder to claim.

 

Accepting the job back and looking for work whilst employed would have been a better route IMO

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

 

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Im going to write a letter of complaint, asking for mediation, SKY breached the Data protection act, also rehabilitation of offenders act 1974, theres also a strong argument of them also abusing my human rights article 8 of a right to a private and family life, i actually think they have exededed just the employment issue and ive also just found out i can legally refuse the offer of re employment due to them obtaining my personal details without my permission, remember, i only gave consent to a Basic disclosure, they performed a standard/enhanced, so, will phone the HR department to find out where to send letter, can only suck it and see.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You have shot yourself in the foot by not accepting the job when re-offered to you to mitigate your losses.

I would SAR them and find out exactly what information you authorised them to apply for and what they received from Disclosure Scotland.

Is the job on the 'Excepted Professions, Offices, Employments and Occupations' list ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, there definatly not exempt from the rehabilitation act 1974 and is NOT an exempt occupation, legally, and has been tested in court i cant have any predudice towards me for refusing my job back as Private and confidential Data about myself was obtained by SKY unlawfully.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Was it sky that broke the DP act or the crb co?

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

IMHO the info should not have been provided to Sky unless you gave permission. They can't be blamed for that. Have to say that I agree with crappoman that you may have shot yourself in the foot by refusing the job.

 

In any case, compensation is likely to be minimal so it's up to you if you think it's worth pursuing, if only for the principle of the matter.

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

Im going to write a letter of complaint, asking for mediation, SKY breached the Data protection act, also rehabilitation of offenders act 1974, theres also a strong argument of them also abusing my human rights article 8 of a right to a private and family life, i actually think they have exededed just the employment issue and ive also just found out i can legally refuse the offer of re employment due to them obtaining my personal details without my permission, remember, i only gave consent to a Basic disclosure, they performed a standard/enhanced, so, will phone the HR department to find out where to send letter, can only suck it and see.

 

Unless you are prepared for a lengthy and costly legal battle I wouldn't bother. As mentioned you would be hard pushed to quantify any actual loss, turning the job down would go against you. It may of been sky made a minor clerical mistake but did quickly attempt to rectify it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A member of my family has an ongoing legal battle with a CRB company, as they disclosed too much information. There is a NWNF that deals solely with these. I will try to find the name. We've been offered £5k to settle out of court so far.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that, yes, my rights have definatly been breach, ive wrote a letter to Sky offering my willingness to settle out of court and asking for mediation, the problem is, Sky obtained the certificate so i dont have a copy of the CRB.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless you are prepared for a lengthy and costly legal battle I wouldn't bother. As mentioned you would be hard pushed to quantify any actual loss, turning the job down would go against you. It may of been sky made a minor clerical mistake but did quickly attempt to rectify it.

 

Minor clerical mistake? they broke the law, Nacro have been in touch, on 3 points of law, Rehabilitation of offenders act 1974, Data protection act, article 8 of the human rights act a right to a private and family life, hardly a minor clerical error...lol..

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...