Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Occupational Health suggested parking spot given. One was - at the bottom of a steep hill


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2983 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

Evening all,

 

I've spent the evening reading the top hits on Google regarding an employer's "requirements" to make reasonable adjustments in regards to parking.

 

So, to the point, I've been to an occupational health assessment and they've deemed my various injuries and defects to be of significant detriment to my lifestyle with no possibility of them getting better, therefore, they've suggested my employer make a parking spot available for me.

 

There's about 10 parking spots in front of the building. They're taken up by upper-level seniority with about three of the spaces regularly empty as those they are allocated to often work at different sites. My OH referral was completed a fair few weeks ago at which point I started using one of the spaces whilst the HR team decided what to do with me. I found out today that:

Senior management don't want me to use a spot at the front of the building

HR are giving me a parking spot at the rear of the building, down a very, very steep hill.

 

What I'd like to know is how can I neutrally approach this issue. How do I calmly and succinctly write to the HR department and ask them what brought them to the conclusion that, after being told I have some significant disabilities, they should allocate me a parking space at the foot of a steep hill?

 

Whilst they have made an adjustment, I don't believe it to be reasonable. In fact, it goes against the point of not disadvantaging someone with a disability. It's a bit like a middle finger right to the , if I'm honest.

 

 

 

Thanks in advance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Try speaking to whoever did your assessment - in a similar situation many years ago, the OH specialist phoned my boss and told him what an idiot he was being, problem solved. If that doesn't work, would it be possible for you to 'have a word' face to face, along the lines of 'I don't want to be difficult but ...'

 

If you have union representation, you may want to keep them in the loop so that they can step in if informal efforts don't bear fruit.

RMW

"If you want my parking space, please take my disability" Common car park sign in France.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your suggestions.

 

I didn't even consider liaising with the Chief Medical Officer, but it's a very good suggestion.

 

I am conscious that the HR team work in a different location and they might not be aware of the geographical issue. I don't want to email the person who is dealing with the case and end up with everything being blown out of proportion. There's no union to speak of, and I don't feel threatened by the decision or the business. They have been very accommodating in respect to the office environment and time given for a vast number of hospital appointments.

 

Prior to this particular outcome I was extremely pleased with the adjustments that were being made. I do fear that with the Managing Director and another senior colleague taking issue with me using the space, this could get someone's back up that I would rather it didn't.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am conscious that the HR team work in a different location and they might not be aware of the geographical issue.

 

That might be you're best angle. Phone the person (if it's not in writing, it's much harder to pass it on and get others involved) and start with 'I expect you're not familiar with ....'

 

You're not only making them aware of the issue, you're also providing them with a reason why they got it wrong, so no loss of face for anyone.

RMW

"If you want my parking space, please take my disability" Common car park sign in France.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...