Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Employment advice


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3214 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

i will beg to differ on this one as to The two year rule to bring a claim to a Tribunal is for unfair dismissal.

 

You can still go to a tribunal if the dismissal was for making a protected disclosure or the employer infringing a statutory right

 

The right not to suffer unlawful deductions of wages is a statutory right under section 13 Employment Rights Act 1996.

 

The claim must be instigated withing three months less one day from when the deduction happened

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

If the contract states the number of hours (37.5) to be worked over a week then that is an Express term. You can go for unlawful deduction of wages under section 13 ERA 1996.

You can get a fee remission if claiming state benefits

Link to post
Share on other sites

As i have already stated, a fee remission is available for an Employment Tribunal if claiming Benefits or on a low income. A County Court will expect this to go through ACAS and the Employment Tribunal Service. Most claims to the tribunal service are settled before it even gets to the Tribunal day being allocated. Just as in a county court claim they expect all parties to try and agree settlement first.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You cannot instigate a claim with the Employment Tribunal service without first going through ACAS. They will put a hold on any time constraints (Three months less one day) in bringing a claim. Normally up to a month

 

They will allocate a mediator to act on your behalf for free. If agreement cannot be reached ACAS will then give you a code. You use this code when instigating a claim through the Tribunal service

 

Them not supply Payslips works in her favour so do not worry to much as it is a statutory duty

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is only on very limited occasions you will have to pay the other sides costs if you lose an Employment Tribunal, Less than 1% of all cases. Costs will be payable if the Tribunal considers your claim to be vexatious and little prospect of success, or you have turned down a reasonable offer of settlement.. The Tribunal Judge will infer on that at any prior cases management hearing. If you carry on after the courts advice as to success and lose then you deserve to be given a costs order.

 

Less than 1% of all Employment Tribunal claims have a cost order go against them.

 

Any fee remission will be means tested though as to any income coming into the home as stated which needs to be considered. If you are over the threshold as to income the costs involved at an Employment Tribunal are about £1200 in total just in court fees. If you do decide to go down the Employment Tribunal route you need to get your fee exemption form in very quick. Remember you only have three months less one day to bring a claim to the tribunal.

 

If the employee walked out and has not claimed Constructive Dismissal the employer can issue a counter claim for breach of contract. That is claiming back the costs of a temp as an example until the vacancy was filled. That also needs to be considered. It is something like only 5% of all constructive dismissal claims are successful and 99.9999% of the time involves a "Protected Characteristic" so dismissal will be automatically unfair irrespective of the two year qualifying period.

 

I would say go down the Employment Tribunal route if you get the fee remission. See what comes back in their witness statement, then decide if you wish to proceed. If they turn you down for a fee remission due to income, then go down the Civil/County Court Route. Have a chat with your local CAB or Law Centre as they might take the case on for you

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...