Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Please also take photos of the sign at the entrance as well as any signs inside the car park especially any that are different. Please take them from a distance where we can read them and if there is a payment machine, the sign on the machine or very close to it that explains their T&Cs for the machine.
    • Thanks for getting the signage posted up so quickly. The sign on entry should explain their T&Cs. As they don't it means that  what they have given you is  an offer to treat, not a contract. For there to be a contract they would have had to put their offer at the entrance.  You cannot put a notice saying that their T&Cs are inside the car park and expect motorists to be subject to those T&Cs when they are unaware what the terms are.. They have to be able to read them and understand them before they can accept them. My feeling is that the sign that includes the charge of £100 is too small to be acceptable On top of that the sign at the entrance is for Parking Control Solutions while the signs inside are from HX Management-a completely different animal. To strengthen your case for not paying them is the fact that their PCN is not compliant.  Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 there are certain wordings in  the NTK  that by Law must comply with the Act. They don't  have to quote that part of the Act in their PCN but the relevant wording has to be included. PoFA Schedule 4 paragraph 9 [2]   the notice must  [f]   warn the keeper that if, after the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice is given— (i)the amount of the unpaid parking charges specified under paragraph (d) has not been paid in full, and (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid;   Your  NTK does not include  [if all the applicable conditions  under the Schedule have been met ]thus rendering the NTK non compliant.  
    • I agree its about time but why has it taken for the National Crime Agency to flag this up for then to take action and not Ofcom.   Yet again a Government Agency that is meant to deal with this hasn't Ofcom but flagged by another Agency NCA.   If the telephone companies have this facility in place already to do this then why hasn't Ofcom been pushing them to stop all these scam calls and giving them massive fines for not doing so.    
    • Hi   Send this to them:   Dear Sir/Madam   Formal Complaint   Reference:            (insert their complaint reference number here)   Thank you for your response letter dated XX/XX/2021 which I received by email on XX/XX/2021 that contained your Original Email sent that showed due to your Maladministration that you had sent the Original Email containing my Personal Data to an incorrect email address due to spelling errors in the email address.   a)      Due to this Maladministration of this email being sent to the incorrect email address this email contained my Personal Data which is a Data Protection Breach therefore I require clarification from yourselves that this Breach has been reported to your Data Protection Officer and what action is being taken to ensure that my Personal Data contained in that Original Email has not been read by the recipient that you sent that email to with the incorrect email address.   As the email was sent by yourselves to my correct email address containing the original email showing the incorrect email address was due to spelling errors (maladministration) your IT Department will be able to obtain those emails sent.   If I do not get a satisfactory response that this has been dealt with by your Data Protection Officer, I will report this Data Breach to the Information Commissioners Office (ICO) https://ico.org.uk/make-a-complaint/   b)      Due to this Maladministration I failed to receive your Stage 1 complaint response within the allocated time limit for a Stage 1 response therefore this complaint should be dealt with as a Stage 2 Complaint and if you refuse to treat this as a Stage 2 Complaint, I require Full Clarification for your refusal.   I was placed in this Tenancy via the Rough Sleepers Initiative and I find your response about damaged/destroyed items that you would not be able to look into this as this happened 2 years ago but all tenants regardless of private or social housing are responsible for arranging their own contents insurance totally unacceptable as again, I was never notified nor informed of this requirement on taking up this tenancy.   I require clarification from yourself that when a New Tenant takes up a Tenancy Agreement with yourselves why are the not informed of this requirement of Contents Insurance which you should be duty bound to inform all tenants on taking up a tenancy agreement if such a requirement and it should also be noted within that tenants Housing File which you have full access to as dealing with complaint so I require clarification as well if this is noted in my Housing File.   You state multiple properties throughout the area were affected by sewage flood on the same day and the issue will have stemmed from the mains which is not your responsibility.   a)      You have failed to take into that the above statement from yourself blaming the Mains is without any actual evidence from yourselves to back up this claim therefore I require clarification as to what actual evidence you have and to be provided with copies.   b)      You also failed to take into account that in my initial complaint letter that on 12th July 2021 basement flats 1 & 2 were flooded by sewage exacerbated by blockage in the property’s drainage. The blockage has been confirmed by two contractors after the flooding including CCR who were subcontracted by Pyramid Plus that it was the properties drainage that was blocked. Also, while I was decanted from this property, I was contacted by CCR who confirmed that the drain was blocked but they could not access manhole as it was inaccessible as it is located in a utility cupboard underneath carpet, floorboards so how could this be the Main and not your responsibility when it is within the properties boundaries.   Your response about how complaints have been made by residents in relation to this issue is that your system does not allow you to find that information is completely unacceptable as your Housing Association should be able to produce these as part of ongoing repairs and maintenance/procurement processes to present these to your Board for there yearly Budget meeting if not why not.   Then you state you are under no obligation to share that information; therefore, your organisation is not being Open and Accountable to your Service Users and under which Article of the General Data Protection Act (GDPR) are you using for this refusal.   You have also failed to mention that I can make that above request under the Freedom of Information Act (FOI) and what is your process for such a request again not being Open and Accountable.   I await your response.
    • RE: EC261 Compensation   It's normal they won't have asked you to contact them . Your initial rescheduling was obviously done by a bot - and there was no human to notice the mistake, as far as the bot knew your scheduling was perfectly normal so there was no need to ask you to contact them.   As long as that was done 2 weeks in advance the carrier's liability to notify you is fulfilled.   (You could have contacted them there and pointed out that the new schedule was impossible. Unfortunately you didn't. Claiming you didn't notice is not likely to work in your favor)   The bot who sent you the 24h confirmation didn't notice the mistake either, obviously.   At some point a human or another bot finally identified the problem and that's when they called you. As far as they are concerned neither you nor them had noticed the scheduling mistake and they took it on them to notify you so you don't have a bad surprise when you try and check in.   However as far as I know, neither flight was delayed or cancelled. You could have taken both flights, if you had the power to be in two places at the same time.   So I don't think there is any scope to claim for EC261. But claim forms are free so feel free to try.     Then, you can certainly make an old fashioned claim (directly to BA)   What could perhaps play in your favor:   It's the carrier's responsibility to ensure that they don't sell you a ticket where the flyer cannot meet the minimum connection time or MCT.   This situation mostly applies to situations where the flyer doesn't know and gets caught. For example say you connect at LHR and you are given 35 minutes to connect. This may look just fine to an unsuspecting tourist, but in reality there is practically zero chance to make the connection, therefore the airline is liable here for selling you this ticket resulting in you missing your connection   In your case though it could be argued that even an unsuspecting tourist should be able to tell that it is not possible for them to depart 5 minutes prior to disembarking and therefore that you should have checked your notification more carefully.   The fact that the bot allowed such a glaring mistake to happen is certainly an argument in your favour shall you decide to make a complaint.     What doesn't play in your favor:   The airline obviously did their best to get you to your destination as soon as they noticed their mistake. They offered you more than one alternative (the first alternative would have got you in time at your destination, but you declined) and you then accepted another alternative, and fully travelled the ticket. That is a very strong position for them.     What did you lose and what do you intend to claim for?   You took the overnight connection so obviously you had to stay at an airport hotel. Is that correct? Did you keep the receipt for your hotel and meals?   You certainly should have asked them on the phone when negotiating your re-route that they provide a hotel. Within 20hrs of the flight it's something they would most probably not have denied to you (but airlines will generally avoid offering off the bat. Why lose money when a customer is just going to roll with it and pay for their own stay anyway, right?). After the fact it's going to be a lot more difficult to claim.   I do certainly think it would be reasonable to try and write them a polite but firm letter to claim for that. Not 700 euros, not damages and hardship and all that jazz, just the extra expense you incurred following a scheduling mistake that they made (that should have never happened) and that they didn't notice until way too late in the day , with your categorical inability to leave 3 hours earlier (you had very important business meetings or something critical, it certainly wasn't just convenience) and the extra costs incurred, and asking that they kindly provide compensation for the hotel and meals, which you feel it was their duty to offer you and you are politely disappointed that they didn't, and thafully you happen to have kept all the receipts. Put Alex Cruz on copy for good measure.   No guarantee but I feel it has a fair chance of success. Most probably you will be offered a heap of Avios instead of cash. It's then up for you to decide whether you want to accept that. Personally I wouldn't bother going further, but that's just me. See if anyone here disagrees, and do let us know what you decide and keep in touch with how it went.            
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

unfair treatment at work


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2322 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, I could do with a little help as new to this. I am working for a large car parts firm delivering parts, I suffer from sleep apnea which is a disability, one of my work mates which I thought was a mate told the manager how tired I looked and swerved the van, so immediately I was send home with no explaination and no proof of the allegation. I am off sick with stress due to all this, my disability is controlled by a CPAP machine and I am perfectly fine to drive and have never had an accident, I feel as though I am being discriminated against and that no one believes me which is awful. Any advice would be greatful, thanks in advance, also forgot to mention that I pointed out that other drivers have had accidents, quite badly some of them, my reply was "but they don't have sleep apnea" which means I am being treated differently to everyone else

Edited by isisandkia1961
neede to add a few things
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is difficult, as your employer has a responsibility for you and the wider public. The only way you will move forward with this is a Doctors report saying that you are fit to perform your job as a delivery driver. If you had an accident after this had been reported to your employer, they would be in trouble., being potentially liable.

 

See your GP or the doctor who has treated your condition to see what they can do.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your reply, I am seeing the docs and hospital for my conditions but I went through the same thing 12 months ago so its not as though my company didn't know about my disability but because one person said I looked tired, but by the way was a lie, the thing that popped into there head was "you have got sleep apnea" and I know that I am fit to drive, I wouldn't risk my life or anyone elses if I thought I would a danger on the road. Going to see some one at the CAB as all this is really stressing me out as all I want to do is get back to work, they have no idea what they are causing me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure CAB will be able to help. If your employer thinks you are not fit for work driving for them, then it is up to you to get a medical saying you are fit to drive.

 

The company you work for have a legal responsibility for ensuring that their drivers are fit to drive and any slight doubt must be taken seriously. Whether they should offer some occupational health assessment in this situation I am not sure. Depends on your contract, as to whether you are entitled to pay while you are absent as they sent you home.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Must agree with the above. The employer is completely in the clear here since they are acting on an observation/concern expressed by a colleague (irrespective of whether this is true or not). The responsibility for health and safety is sufficient for them to act in the way that they have.

 

It is also true however that they have an obligation to act within the rights afforded under the Equality Act, and since they are aware of a disability (as defined by the EA) should be looking to obtain information from your medical records, possibly an independent assessment and report of your condition, maybe a driving assessment, and consideration of what reasonable adjustments can be made to allow you to work relatively normally.

 

If medical advice and any assessment carried out were to indicate a risk, then the employer could look at options including non-driving work or ultimately capability to remain in work. I say that not to worry you, and I sincerely hope it doesn't come to that, but it is a possibility.

 

So, you need to discuss this ASAP with the employer - of course once you are considered fit to do so. Emphasise that DVLA considers you fit to drive, based on medical opinion and assessment. You are perfectly willing to share your medical reports with the employer and to have an independent assessment of your condition and even a driving assessment if necessary. The employer would be wise to take aome or all of these options up before doing anything further.

Any advice given is done so on the assumption that recipients will also take professional advice where appropriate.

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

DONATE HERE

 

If I have been helpful in any way - please feel free to click on the STAR to the left!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the advice but the person who is involved in all this has done the same to others in the workplace either to get extra feathers in her cap or not, I have been in touch with the DVLA and they have told me I am still able to drive, my employers now are looking at the fact that on my sick note the doc has put "stress" as even my doc thinks all this is detrimental to my health, I have told my firm they can look into my medical records as ive nothing to hide but it seems strange that they did exactly the same thing to me 12 months ago and I was found to be fit to drive and carry on as normal but because they are a big company they can treat ppl like something you scrape off ur shoe, thanks again for your advice forgot to say that I haven't got a contract asked for a copy as I remember signing one but they were adamant that I had one until I proved that no one in my branch had a copy

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you can catalogue the previous instances where this person has acted mischievously then it may be worth lodging a grievance?

Any advice given is done so on the assumption that recipients will also take professional advice where appropriate.

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

DONATE HERE

 

If I have been helpful in any way - please feel free to click on the STAR to the left!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that sidewinder I am getting on to that grievance as its not only me shes done this sort of thing to

What would she gain from this ? Extra work for her and her friends ? I don't think a grievance will go down well and it may not help your cause.

 

I think it would be better to address the health issue that has been raised and to make sure your employer is happy with you to drive for them,

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

I woudl also be looking into joining a union who can represent you in the future.

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

What would she gain from this ? Extra work for her and her friends ? I don't think a grievance will go down well and it may not help your cause.

 

I think it would be better to address the health issue that has been raised and to make sure your employer is happy with you to drive for them,

 

I agree up to a point. Whilst it would be far better to be able to convince the employer of fitness to drive (and on the available evidence this does not seem to be in doubt to those outside of the organisation), if this is the second such instance inside 12 months then it may well be that the employer is having doubts and this could all end up being rather uncomfortable anyway.

 

If the employer's doubts have stemmed solely from the word of on person only, and if there was no just cause for such comments to be made, then a grievance may be entirely in order - after all that is effectively what this person has done to the OP. For certain it is not the way to gain popularity, but if the OP genuinely feels aggrieved, and the alternative looks as though capability is being brought into question, then it may be appropriate.

 

Absolutely agree that the OP needs to know exactly where they stand first and foremost, and I restate that the employer should be given medical evidence, DVLA approval etc, but if it is looking like the employer is seeking to take the OP off the road despite medical advice, then start hitting back.

Any advice given is done so on the assumption that recipients will also take professional advice where appropriate.

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

DONATE HERE

 

If I have been helpful in any way - please feel free to click on the STAR to the left!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also the advantage of union membership is that IF you end up being dismissed later on and it could be a breach of the single equality act, your union *might* take the case on for you and help with the tribunal, inc the fees.

They can also help represent in grievances etc as well

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

Thanks for your reply, I am seeing the docs and hospital for my conditions but I went through the same thing 12 months ago so its not as though my company didn't know about my disability but because one person said I looked tired, but by the way was a lie, the thing that popped into there head was "you have got sleep apnea" and I know that I am fit to drive, I wouldn't risk my life or anyone elses if I thought I would a danger on the road. Going to see some one at the CAB as all this is really stressing me out as all I want to do is get back to work, they have no idea what they are causing me.

 

I suspect the relevant test you can ask the hospital for is a sleep study (polysomnography) performed with you on your CPAP machine, to demonstrate that (treated) you no longer suffer apneic episodes, contrasting this to your (diagnosis, untreated) study.

 

If you are at a centre that offers it, a functional Maintenance of Wakefullness test (such as the OSLER test) would show if you suffer from excessive daytime sleepiness - pretty definitive evidence to provide to your employer but very few centres offer this.

 

As an alternative approach : is your employer's fleet fitted with "black boxes", and if so : is it worth asking if your metrics show an increase in sudden breaking / swerving than the "normal" drivers - as if not on what basis do your employers base their concerns?

Link to post
Share on other sites

They review the SD card on the machine at the yearly review. It gives lovely figures such as usage and episodes where it has to work on you.

 

They fact that you are compliant and are using the machine makes you fit to drive. If the treatment was failing the the hospital has a duty of care to inform dvla.

 

There would be no need for a sleep text now you are on treatment.

 

You could even obtain the resmed software and upload the SD card yourself on pc or laptop. Pm me if you need it. Assuming you are on the resmed box ofc.

 

On a lighter note, do try not to strangulate yourself on the pipe...

 

http://www.sleep-apnoea-trust.org

 

Are good.... Maybe get in touch too

 

http://www.sleep-apnoea-trust.org/detailed-guidance-to-drivers.htm

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

They review the SD card on the machine at the yearly review. It gives lovely figures such as usage and episodes where it has to work on you.

 

They fact that you are compliant and are using the machine makes you fit to drive. If the treatment was failing the the hospital has a duty of care to inform dvla.

 

There would be no need for a sleep text now you are on treatment.

 

You could even obtain the resmed software and upload the SD card yourself on pc or laptop. Pm me if you need it. Assuming you are on the resmed box ofc.

 

On a lighter note, do try not to strangulate yourself on the pipe...

 

http://www.sleep-apnoea-trust.org

 

Are good.... Maybe get in touch too

 

http://www.sleep-apnoea-trust.org/detailed-guidance-to-drivers.htm

 

So, does the SD card show compliance with the set treatment parameters, or "effective treatment"?.

I suggest it shows the former, but doesn't prove the later, which makes a difference if someone claims "treatment not working"

 

"They fact that you are compliant and are using the machine makes you fit to drive" : wrong.

The fact that the compliance with effective treatment has removed the daytime / excessive sleepiness makes the OP fit to drive. If the OP needed a higher pressure set to resolve their symptoms then the current treatment wouldn't make them fit to drive.

 

The data on the SD card shows the OP to be compliant with using the machine & the pressure set / achieved.

This is enough data, but only IF:

a) the OP says "my symptoms have resolved" and

b) no one else (like the employer!) is suggesting the OP is still symptomatic.

 

If the suggestion (rightly or wrongly!) is the OP is still symptomatic from sleep apnoea then a repeat sleep study (on their current CPAP support) could be used to show their current setup treats their apnoeas : even then, that just shows their apnoeas have resolved.

 

If there is any suggestion of another sleep issue such as idiopathic hypersomnolence contributing, then overnight polysomnography won't help on its own. This is why sometimes the overnight study is followed by a MSLT (multiple sleep latency test) to rule out narcolepsy or idiopathic hypersomnolence, or, if the OP was forced to prove they have been effectively treated : a Maintenance of Wakefullness test could be used (to show that not only were they compliant with treatment / their apnoeas were prevented) but that the end result was that their symptoms of excessive sleepiness were EFFECTIVELY treated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"As an alternative approach : is your employer's fleet fitted with "black boxes", and if so : is it worth asking if your metrics show an increase in sudden breaking / swerving than the "normal" drivers - as if not on what basis do your employers base their concerns?"

 

I would never in a million years invite anyone to look through tracking generated data, i'd put my house on it everyone here who drives would see many bad readings on it and unless you remembered every occasion "oh that was where i car stopped suddenly, a car pulled out, i swerved as kids were messing etc." it will only make you look bad. The employer does not ever need to gauge this against how the rest drive, only the highway code and road traffic act.

 

The only way for me for the OP to prove he is fit to drive is through medical reports, lack of accidents is a factor but their concern is the accident waiting to happen, with the recent bin case in scotland where the driver killed the pedestrians after having a heart attack i know the transport department where i work is very nervy about any know risk for their drivers now and is undergoing a massive health surveillance excercise.

 

The employers position here is simple

 

Risk Assessment :-

Hazard - Road traffic accident due to sleep or tiredness caused by their staff member with a medical condition they were aware of.

Likelihood of it happening. -????????

 

I'm all for employee's rights but if i was a manager here the person would be off driving until i was positive that likelihood was 0% and that i could also prove this in court/coroners on behalf of the employer if one of my employees injured a member of the public where one or more fatalities is a definite possibility of the known hazard.

 

Unless the OP can prove he is as safe to drive as the normal employee i get the feeling this will turn into a medical redeployment case where the employer should be looking at alternative roles in the company.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"As an alternative approach : is your employer's fleet fitted with "black boxes", and if so : is it worth asking if your metrics show an increase in sudden breaking / swerving than the "normal" drivers - as if not on what basis do your employers base their concerns?"

 

I would never in a million years invite anyone to look through tracking generated data, i'd put my house on it everyone here who drives would see many bad readings on it and unless you remembered every occasion "oh that was where i car stopped suddenly, a car pulled out, i swerved as kids were messing etc." it will only make you look bad. The employer does not ever need to gauge this against how the rest drive, only the highway code and road traffic act.

 

The only way for me for the OP to prove he is fit to drive is through medical reports, lack of accidents is a factor but their concern is the accident waiting to happen, with the recent bin case in scotland where the driver killed the pedestrians after having a heart attack i know the transport department where i work is very nervy about any know risk for their drivers now and is undergoing a massive health surveillance excercise.

 

The employers position here is simple

 

Risk Assessment :-

Hazard - Road traffic accident due to sleep or tiredness caused by their staff member with a medical condition they were aware of.

Likelihood of it happening. -????????

 

I'm all for employee's rights but if i was a manager here the person would be off driving until i was positive that likelihood was 0% and that i could also prove this in court/coroners on behalf of the employer if one of my employees injured a member of the public where one or more fatalities is a definite possibility of the known hazard.

 

Unless the OP can prove he is as safe to drive as the normal employee i get the feeling this will turn into a medical redeployment case where the employer should be looking at alternative roles in the company.

 

"i'd put my house on it everyone here who drives would see many bad readings on it" : the very reason my advice to the OP was to be compared to the "average" / "normal" driver.

Not "do I brake / suddenly steer" at all, but "do I do so more severely / more often" than usual.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...