Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Did you take screenshots or anything of the descriptions that you gave? Do you have any evidence to support you say? In any event, you paid for the insurance, you declared the parts having given the descriptions and they accepted it all on that basis. You have begun the claim procedure yet so I suggest that you do so. We'll see what happens. In any event, it could be said that the various sections are contradictory. Parts relating to vehicles are containing three separate sections and it is relatively difficult to discern which section a particular part should come into. Section 69 of the consumer rights act relates to ambiguities and basically says that an ambiguity must be interpreted in favour of the consumer.  
    • I have booked a Hotel/Flights Package with the above paying a 10% deposit with the balance due a month before travel next August.   On looking at Cancellation Charges they virtually say 100% 84 days out plus.   According to the Package Travel and Linked Travel Arrangements regulations 2018 - termination fees have to be "Reasonable and Justifiable"   I find it hard to comprehend how last minutes charges could fall into the above description.   For example the hotel is available on Booking.com for our dates with no pre-payment and free cancellation up to the day before arrival.   I'm not sure of their arrangement with BA but the tickets we reserved have doubled in price in the last week and could easily be resold.   I can't find any anecdotal evidence or Court Cases relating to them trying to collect Cancellation Charges from people who have not already paid the full balance and cancel. If I were to cancel 8 months out is it likely they would pursue me for the remaining balance.    
    • Hi   Something else I think you need to ask the Insurer for Clarification on is.   That you require full clarification on which clauses within the Terms & Condition of the Policy they are using to refuse payment under the Policy.     I would also consider sending the Insurer a Subject Access Request simply asking for 'ALL DATA' this covers whatever format they hold it in whether it be email/telephone recording/written format etc. (note: if they require you to use their own subject access request form always put 'ALL DATA' on their form)    
    • matters not what they come up with it's statute barred      
    • Revised defence:   The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim vague and are generic in nature. 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. The Claimant claims £2247.91 is owed under a regulated consumer credit account under reference xxxxxxx. I do not recall the precise details or agreement and have sought verification from the claimant and the claimants solicitor by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 78 request who are yet to fully comply. I dont believe they have provided this yet correctly   2. Paragraph 3 is denied.The Defendant contends that no notice of assignment pursuant to s.136 of the Law of Property Act & s.82 A of the CCA1974 has ever been served by the Claimant as alleged or at all. still stands   3. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of assignment/balance/breach requested by CPR 31. 14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:   (a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence any cause of action and service of a Default Notice or termination notice; and © show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;   4. After receiving this claim I requested by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a section 78 request for copies of any documents referred to within the Claimants' particulars to establish what the claim is for. To date they have failed to comply to my CPR 31.14 request and also my section 78 request and remain in default with regards to this request.   5. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.   6. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974.   7. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.    
  • Our picks

Andyorch

Private messages at work can be read by European employers

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1410 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Employers can read workers' private messages sent via chat software and webmail accounts during working hours, judges have ruled.

 

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) said a firm that read a worker's Yahoo Messenger chats sent while he was at work was within its rights.

 

Judges said he had breached the company's rules and that his employer had a right to check on his activities.

Such policies must also protect workers against unfettered snooping, they said.

 

The judges, sitting in the ECHR in Strasbourg, handed down their decision on Tuesday. Countries that have ratified the European Convention on Human Rights, which include Britain, have agreed to abide by the ECHR rulings that involve them.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-35301148


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a bit miseleading.

The case itself, BĂRBULESCU v. ROMANIA JUDGMENT, is relatively short at only 31 pages and focussed on a yahoo email account that was set up for responding to customer complaints.

The ECtHR may have handed down their opinion in favour of the employer in the case, but surely, courts are bound only to “take into account” Strasbourg case law, under s2 of the Human Rights Act 1998, which means in some cases, the UK seems to have completely ignored ECtHR opinions..


In England advise is a verb (a doing word) advise/advising/advised, advice is a noun. I might ask for advice or give advice.

 

The same with license (verb) license/licensing/licensed, but one would have a driving licence (noun).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems fair to me. If you want privacy, use your own Internet connection.


"Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for Poundland"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is a bit miseleading.

The case itself, BĂRBULESCU v. ROMANIA JUDGMENT, is relatively short at only 31 pages and focussed on a yahoo email account that was set up for responding to customer complaints.

The ECtHR may have handed down their opinion in favour of the employer in the case, but surely, courts are bound only to “take into account” Strasbourg case law, under s2 of the Human Rights Act 1998, which means in some cases, the UK seems to have completely ignored ECtHR opinions..

 

Yes, Its also my understanding that it is accounts used for work purposes, even if it is a personal account.

I have warned friends about this and suggested that any personal accounts they use for any work purposes, even if it is just to 'do work a favour' have some t&c added to the sig something to the effect that 'it is a personal account which may occasionally be used for the benefit of my employer but remains a purely personal and private account.

This may not stand up to a legal test.


I express my honestly held opinions - they are nothing more or less than that.

... Its just doing some due diligence that makes them seem unusual ...

 

Please don't assume what you see here is what I wrote - At least some of my posts HAVE been edited without my knowledge or agreement - or anything showing people they have been amended

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although in may cases, it would actually be a physical impossibility to read messages or mails without some very complex software on a PC.

 

If a work email account then yes, it would be possible to read mails, but if a hotmail for example, it maybe possible to read it if youve attached it to your outlook, basically by changing the users password and effectively logging in as them, this may give access to any accounts such as email, messaging where some sort of automatic/password remembering is set up.

 

BUT if for example you used the webmail version of hotmail AND logged in every time you used it, it would be impossible for an employee to check emails or messages, without physically looking over your shoulder or some sort of screen recording/viewing (just finished IT contract at college that had something like this).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Complicating it further is that the company apparently considered he had beached their rules, but some companies allow their staff to access the internet via work machines - often only in their own time - eg lunch or breaks.

 

"Mr Barbulescu's employer had banned its staff from sending personal messages at work"


I express my honestly held opinions - they are nothing more or less than that.

... Its just doing some due diligence that makes them seem unusual ...

 

Please don't assume what you see here is what I wrote - At least some of my posts HAVE been edited without my knowledge or agreement - or anything showing people they have been amended

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does this affect me with a work provided phone which I also share as a personal device? Do they have the right to see everything on the phone? It was suggested by my boss to use it as a personal phone since it would save me having two phones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How does this affect me with a work provided phone which I also share as a personal device? Do they have the right to see everything on the phone? It was suggested by my boss to use it as a personal phone since it would save me having two phones.

 

I'm not a legal representative, and I would think that even those are still digesting the implications of this, but in the case referenced here the company claimed they had a clear policy of no personal use of company equipment/email (and apparently that the person was repeatedly warned), and I believe it does appear to state that a separate purely personal email account was NOT referenced.

 

I would suggest you get written confirmation from your boss that any private material or use is approved and remains private and personal

 

Also be aware of any taxable benefits implications, and that you dont claim any personal use as business use.


I express my honestly held opinions - they are nothing more or less than that.

... Its just doing some due diligence that makes them seem unusual ...

 

Please don't assume what you see here is what I wrote - At least some of my posts HAVE been edited without my knowledge or agreement - or anything showing people they have been amended

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would keep using my own personal phone for personal stuff


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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only they didn't actually say that. They said work emails and echr judgements are not binding, there "observed".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no different to time before these phones etc/internet, main companies use to divert all calls thru switchboards , personal calls to personnel to take emergency messages only, sorry but if you want to stay in wet nappy stage, get out of the work areas.


:mad2::-x:jaw::sad:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...