Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • That is a big improvement Dave and I do agree that it s best to leave it till the last moment to prevent VCS from countering your WS. [usually using doubtful logic that can't be easily argued against in a Court atmosphere] However my first post [no. 32] about the contract is the one that really exposes Jake's flummery and calls into  question jost how close he comes to committing perjury. And that is what hopefully VCS will not want questioned by a Judge. 
    • just to be clear here..... the DVLA do not send letters if a drivers licence address differs from any car's V5C that shows the same driver as it's registered keeper.
    • sorry she is a private individual, the cars are parking on her land. she can clamp the cars. only firms were outlawed from doing it bazza. thats what the victims of people dumping cars on their drives near airports did and they didn't not get prosecuted.    
    • The DVLA keeps two records of you. One as a driver and one for your car. If they differ you might find out in around a month when they will send you a reminder as well as to your other half for their car. If you receive nothing then you can be fairly sure that you were tailgating though wouldn't explain why they didn't pick up your car on one of drive past their cameras. However even if you do get a PCN later then your situation will not change. The current PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 which is the main law that covers private parking. It doesn't comply for two reasons. 1. Section 9 [2][a] states  (2)The notice must— (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates; The PCN states 47 minutes which are the arrival and departure times not the time you were actually parked. if you subtract the time you took to drive from the entrance. look for a parking place  park in it perhaps having to manoeuvre a couple of times to fit within the lines and unload the children reloading the children getting seat belts on  driving to the exit stopping for cars pedestrians on the way you may well find that the actual time you were parked was quite likely to be around ten minutes over the required time.  Motorists are allowed a MINIMUM of ten minutes Grace period [something that the rogues in the parking industry conveniently forget-the word minimum] . So it could be that you did not overstay. 2] Sectio9 [2][f]  (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 PCN does not include the words in brackets and in 2a the Act included the word "must". Another fail. What those failures mean is that MET cannot transfer the liability to pay the charge from the driver to the keeper. Only the driver is now liable which is why we recommend our members not to appeal. It is so easy to reveal who was driving by saying "when I parked the car" than "when the driver parked the car".  As long as they don't know who was driving they have little chance of winning in court. This is partly because Courts do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person. And because anyone with a valid motor insurance policy is able to drive your cars. It is a shame that you are too far away to get photos of the car park signage. It is often poor and quite often the parking rogues lose in Court on their poor signage alone. I hope hat you can now relax and not panic about the PCN. You will receive many letters from Met, their unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors threatening you with ever higher amounts of money. The poor dears have never read the Act which states quite clearly that the maximum sum that can be charged is the amount on the signs. The Act has only been in force for 12 years so it may take a  few more years for the penny to drop.  You can safely ignore everything they send you unless or until they send you a Letter of Claim. Just come back to us if they do send one of those love letters to you and we will advise on a snotty letter to send them. In the meantime go on and enjoy your life. Continue reading other threads and if you do get any worrying letters let us know. 
  • 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

Changing of resignation date


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3032 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

This is a strange one and been hard to answer so far.

My friend is a teacher and has handed in his notice to finish on Aug 31st (notice period in contract gives latest date of May 31st for Aug finish). This was done before Christmas. His circumstances have now changed and he wanted to change the finish date to April (notice period in contract gives latest date of Feb 28th for April finis). This is still well within the contracted notice period but the employer has said he will have to work his original notice or be sued for breach of contract!

Can this be the case? has he effectivly somehow signed up to a fixed term contract?

Answers on a post card please.

He will be taking legal advice but wondered if anyone has had previous experience of this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The head will not accept a withdrawal of the original resignation though and previous advice has said they are within their rights to refuse to allow withdrawal hence it being an amendment request. Legal advice received as follows: " Your ‘new contract’ if you had one would be on the same terms as the old, eg. That you could resign provided you did so on notice with the notice ending at certain key points. So, if you are within your old contract provisions for resignation by Easter then that’s not a breach. Even if it were, the issue for the school you would be leaving is what exactly can they sue for? They have to prove that they have suffered a loss and generally speaking they make a gain in that they are no longer paying your salary. So, its hard for them to bring a claim anyway even if you were in breach. I think The HT is just trying to worry you and I would say that you have taken some initial advice and understand that you are able to resign even after an earlier resignation has been agreed. Stand your ground, I’m sure the HT will back down."

Link to post
Share on other sites

The employer is not required to accept withdrawal of the original resignation. However, I don't see how they can refuse to accept a subsequent resignation if that is permitted by the contract.

 

If his contract says he is entitled to resign now and finish in April, I don't see how he could be said to be in breach of contract.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

So the plot thickens.

Latest news is the head has said "Once an employee gives notice of resignation, it is effective and can only be varied or retracted with their employer's permission. Once notice is served, it is effective."

The head also states "We are not obliged to release you early from your notice period. Accelerating your leaving date would have an adverse impact on the school..........bla bla bla".

The head then proposes a compromise where he has to go in on afternoons and odd days to help with the Yr 11 exam kids.

The last part says that leaving early "will undoubtedly be a breach of contract" and that it will result in the school perusing for "breach of contract for the recovery of additional costs, which the school will be put by hiring in short term cover in the period after 11th April"

They will no longer be paying his salary which would be in excess of a cover teacher so this holds no weight whatsoever!

He is not interested in the compromise after being threatened with legal action. it would mean he had 2 jobs too so would also be taxed as such.

He will be forwarding this letter to his solicitor for further advice but it seems nuts to me!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The stress is bothering him now which is not fair.

I have said phone union and let them deal with it as it is just going to end up a tit for tat letter writing exercise. Solicitor wants paying for further advice which is expensive and she already said the only thing they could sue for is losses which we believe would not exist as his salary works out at around £165 a day whereas a temp agency teacher costs the school £150 per day.

Why anyone would want to force someone to stay is beyond me!

One other thing the head states is that it is acting in bad faith to leave early (even though he gave an additional 1 months notice on top of what they expect) after they have acted in good faith by acting and relying on his original resignation date? strange statement.

 

I dont think the moving forward of a resignation date has ever been tested in court and believe any case would be expensive and complicated far outweighing any advantage. The fact that losses could not be shown would be a non starter imo. I asked the opinion of the HR dept at my work said they would never pursue this scenario as ample notice has still been given as per contract. They said if they cant recruit in the time allocated its not the fault of the employee so what would they even sue for?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...