Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • dx100uk
      Trying to find contact details for prime credit 5 S.a.r.l

      By dx100uk · Posted

      is the home in joint names but this is solely your debt? need far more history to be able to comment if it's paid off and was not just written of by one partly on their books and sold to anther, thus the cra file says £0. dx
    • tobyjugg2
      Should we trust Sunak or the next PM to fix the Country's problems? (title revised 24/10/22)

      By tobyjugg2 · Posted

      So, Sunak has managed to get someone to 'volunteer to go to Rwanda hasn't he? .. for just £3000 payment to the person plus 5 years free board and lodging isnt it? - cost to UK taxpayer over £300M+ (300 million quid+) isnt it? - Bargain says Rwanda, especially with all the profit we made privately selling those luxury chalets Bravermann advertised for us   I wonder how many brits would jump at that offer? Thousands? Hundreds of thousands? Lets see, up to 5 years free board and lodging and £3k in my pocket .. I'd go - and like that person - just come back if/when I get bored. First job - off to Botswana for a week to see the elephants.   Of course the paid volunteers going to Botswana are meaningless - Rwanda have REPEATEDLY said they wont take any forcibly trafficked people in breach of international law eh? Have the poops actually got any civil servants to agree to go yet - probably end up as more massive payments to VIPal contractors to go and sit there doing nowt shortly eh?    
    • Restart
      Commercial business lease - Letter before Action - Negotiation not going well

      By Restart · Posted

      Hi Wondered if I could get a little advise please. I entered into a commercial lease (3 years) and within a few months I had to leave as the business I was trading with collapsed. I returned the keys to the landlord and explained the situation and no money, also likely to go on benefits but the landlord stuck to their guns. They have now instructed solicitors to send letter before action claiming just over £4000. The lease was mine and so the debt. I know this. I have emailed the solicitors twice to explain I am out of work and that with help from family I could offer a full and final settlement figure of £1500 or £10pw. This was countered by them with an offer to reduce the debt by £400, or pay off the amount over 12 months. I went back with an improved full and final offer of £2500 or £20pw. This has been rejected with the comment 'papers ready to go to court'. I have no hope of paying the £4000 and so it will have to go to court. Pity as I have no debts otherwise but not working is a killer. I wondered if they take me to court, could I ask for mediation? I also think that taking me to court will result in a pretty much nothing per week payment from my benefits. Are companies just pushing ahead with action even if a better offer is on the table? Thanks for your help.
    • Hikertrash
      MET CCTV PNC - Starbucks closed- Southgate Park, Stansted CM24 1PY

      By Hikertrash · Posted

      Hi all, Many thanks for the advice! Unfortunately, the reply to the email was as expected…   Starbucks UK Customer Care <[email protected]> Hi xxxxxx, We are sorry to read you received a parking charge after using our Stansted Airport - A120 DT store. Unfortunately, the car park here is managed by MET parking. Both Starbucks and EuroGarages who own and operate this site are not able to help and have no authority to overturn any parking charges received. If you have followed the below terms then you would need to send all correspondence to [email protected], who will be able to assist you further. Several signs around the car park clarify the below terms and conditions: • Maximum stay 60 minutes, whilst the store is open. If the store is closed, pay to park applies. • The car park is for Starbucks customers only who make a purchase in our store, a charge will be issued if you left the site. • If you had made a purchase and required additional time, you must have inputted your registration number into the in store iPad which would have extended your stay up to 3 hours • To park in a disabled bay, you must have displayed a valid disabled badge. • If Starbucks was closed, you must have paid for parking as charges still apply, following signage located on site. • If you didn’t use the store, you must have paid for parking, following signage located on site Please ensure all further correspondence is directed to MET parking at the above email address, and accept our apologies that we cannot help you further on this matter.  Kind Regards,  Lora K  Customer Care Team Leader Starbucks Coffee Company, Building 4 Chiswick Park, London, W4 5YE
    • Mdg123
      Private parking charge from Euro Car Parks now with Debt Recovery Plus

      By Mdg123 · Posted

      Thanks HB edited and re-uploaded. Thanks for the heads up 👍

  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.

      BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld

      ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report

      WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,

      Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
      WanTToMoveOn

      Picked By

      WanTToMoveOn,

    • Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available

      BankFodder posted a post in a topic,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,
    View All

  • Recommended Topics

Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.

Employment tribunal issue **SETTLED**

georgia099
 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2863 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

georgia099

georgia099

Posted
Posted

Can anyone advise? I have submitted an ET1 claim for unfair dismissal after being dismissed by new employers for gross misconduct by the new employers after the store where I worked was sold.

It was taken over in Nov 2015 but now it appears the sale has not completed due to the new employers disputing the stock price.. What will this mean to me with regards to my claim??

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest topcat14

Guest topcat14

Posted
Posted

Presumably the new (now old) employers still exist as a business.

 

Have you had the early conciliation certificate yet ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
georgia099

georgia099

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Presumably the new (now old) employers still exist as a business.

 

Have you had the early conciliation certificate yet ?

Yes I've got that and submitted the full ET1.. The case is being dealt with by the union but I'm worried it might be a issue that the sale hasnt properly completed..

Link to post
Share on other sites
steampowered

steampowered

Posted
Posted

I don't understand how it could be that the buyer could have dismissed you if the sale didn't complete? If the sale didn't complete surely the previous owners would have remained in control of the company?

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
georgia099

georgia099

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I don't understand how it could be that the buyer could have dismissed you if the sale didn't complete? If the sale didn't complete surely the previous owners would have remained in control of the company?

This is what concerns me.. It definitely hasn't completed although the new owners paid the old owner for the actual shop they stopped the cheque for the stock as they suddenly decided they didn't agree with the SAV cost.. So the money they paid for the shop itself is still sat with the solicitor and the old owner is yet to receive a penny.

Link to post
Share on other sites
georgia099

georgia099

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Other than that my case is rock solid according to the union.. But it is a very strange set of circumstances unfortunately and I've only just learned of this issue with the sale.. I know employment law is very complicated and maybe it could be ruled that if they don't actually own the business fully that they may not be held responsible .. I really don't know what to think.

Link to post
Share on other sites
georgia099

georgia099

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks for that Ericsbrother.. So does that mean it shouldn't have any bearing on my case?? I submitted the ET1 on 14 March so I am expecting their response anytime soon so hopefully won't be an issue then

Link to post
Share on other sites
steampowered

steampowered

Posted
Posted

If the new owner is operating the business, then I think he will be the employer. The key test for an employment contract to transfer is whether the business has been transferred as a 'going concern'.

 

It doesn't really matter whether or not the former owner has been paid. The key point is who is operating the business. The former owner might want to sue the new owner for that payment but that is not your problem.

 

Can I ask who you named as the employer on your ET1 form? Was it the old employer or the new one, and was it an individual or a company? If it was a company, has the company stayed the same or has the business moved to a different company?

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
steampowered

steampowered

Posted
Posted

It sounds like the business is being operated by the new employer, so you were probably correct to name the new employer on your ET1 (assuming he is employing you as an individual sole trader rather than through a company ... if this is the case, you would need to name his company).

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
georgia099

georgia099

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Yes he is a sole trader.. Ive already received an offer through the early conciliation process which I refused on advice from the union..I was just worried that this recent discovery about the sale of the shop might have been an issue but hopefully it won't affect anything although we've yet to receive the ET3 .. What would happen if he doesn't file a response??

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest topcat14

Guest topcat14

Posted
Posted
Yes he is a sole trader.. Ive already received an offer through the early conciliation process which I refused on advice from the union..I was just worried that this recent discovery about the sale of the shop might have been an issue but hopefully it won't affect anything although we've yet to receive the ET3 .. What would happen if he doesn't file a response??

 

Quite simply ..the employer runs the risk of a default judgment and therefore losing the case. Have you submitted a schedule of loss ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
georgia099

georgia099

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Hi.. Heard from union today we've got a tribunal date in July but as yet there is no response from employer so will ask them about the default judgement when I next speak to them. There is a schedule of loss prepared but I don't think it's been submitted yet. The union rep doesn't think it will proceed to tribunal though.. She thinks they will offer to settle before then but will have to wait and see.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...
georgia099

georgia099

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Hi.. Just a little update.. Shop sale not an issue at all.. I've received the ET3.. The union legal dept been having a giggle with it apparently.. I was allegedly given a verbal warning a few weeks before I was dismissed.. Absolutely untrue and I believe even verbal warnings should be in writing so shall be asking for this to be disclosed for the tribunal. Also that they didn't bother with the disciplinary procedure, appeals etc because I would still have been dismissed.. ??

Link to post
Share on other sites
ericsbrother

ericsbrother

Posted
Posted

verbal warnings are formal and noted. Common in larger companies for employee to be given a copy as the warning is usually read to them from a sheet of paper prepared by manager and HR to make sure it is correct. Files will have been passed on from old employer to new employer so there should be a trail for it. If a copy miraculously appears it would be worth comparing the printing and paper with any other document that supposedly came from the same source. The metadata of the computer or printer will give away an attempt to backdate something concocted later Epsom printers put a dot code on every document printed but if the letter came form a different printer then the ink jet spray patterns will be different when magnified. Likewise a different brand of paper may well have a different kaolin content and thus different UV signature or transparency, drying marks etc. things worth looking into if jiggerypokery is suspected.

I once went to a tribunal where somone had given a false witness statement. When I presented forensic evidence that their written statement couldnt possibly be true they wisely declined to repeat their submission to the panel.

Just the thought that something will be scrutinised is normally enough to stop them making a false statement in a formal situation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
georgia099

georgia099

Posted
  • Author
Posted

A little update... Been made an offer today which is a fifth of the value of my claim. I've obviously refused this but unsure what a reasonable offer would actually be. The union have said my case is rock solid and I am more than prepared for the tribunal and that doesn't bother me one bit. Obviously if I can secure an offer that's not too far away I would consider it.. But not too sure what would constitute a fair offer??

Link to post
Share on other sites
georgia099

georgia099

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Basically I was given a written warning after the store was taken over after I submitted a grievance.

It was for something I didn't do which I could easily have proved if the owner had bothered to ask me about it or indeed given me an opportunity to refute it.They also included with it a 0 hour contract when I was working 37 hours a week. I refused to sign it and then 2 days later they put a letter through my door saying I was dismissed for gross misconduct for being rude to the owner.. I.e refusing to sign the contract.

No investigation.. No grievance hearing.. No avenue of appeal given.

Link to post
Share on other sites
georgia099

georgia099

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Yes.. Unfair and wrongful dismissal and notice pay .. Was paid wages owed but that was all.

I did find find another job but less pay so Union have claimed for future losses as well.

Comes to about 5k.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...