Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • As I say thanks for your responses so far but this forum is not for me. Please delete the thread
    • Incidentally, don't imagine that your reasoning above will make an iota of difference to Evri. In fact they are probably not even capable of understanding it. However, you must understand the reasoning. This is essential because you will be bringing your case. It is highly likely that it will go to trial and you will have to have sufficient control over the law and the logic to be able to put it to the judge in a persuasive manner and also to answer the judge's questions in a competent fashion. You will have to issue a legal action so once you have sent the letter, start preparing your particulars of claim. Let's do one thing at a time.
    • Firstly, please will you note that when you post solid blocks of text, it makes it very difficult for people to read – especially on a small screen such as a telephone. The first post you made has already been restructured with paragraph spacing by the site team. Everything we do is free – and would be pleased not to have to do this kind of thing again. I'm restructuring your most recent post is well. I've looked at the four-page document you have posted above. I only want to deal with the letter of claim so far. We know that laptops are on the non-compensation list – and as you have referred to that, you may as well then go on to make your legal points and explain why the non-compensation list is irrelevant. Of course Evri are monitoring the thread so they will know about it anyway. But the whole point is that not only would the insurance requirement – had it been available – have been contrary to section 57 and that it would have been an attempt to exclude or limit liability, also trying to include a huge list of items for which they say they will not compensate you if the fail in their duty to exercise reasonable skill and care is also a breach of section 57. Particularly, as you declared that it was a laptop. They then effectively alerted you that it was on the non-compensation list. This was the equivalent of alerting you that you should be careful because even if the breach the delivery contract and failed to exercise reasonable skill and care, because it is a laptop, they will exclude liability and even though that is contrary to section 57 of the Consumer Rights Act and therefore unenforceable. So in effect they are committing two breaches of contract. First of all they have failed to exercise reasonable skill and care – breach number one. They then have attempted to exclude liability for their breach number one – and that then becomes breach number two. In fact the bar is raised even more because they have the option to refuse to take the laptop because you declared it. They still were prepared to carry it. Not only that, if they consider that there is some additional risk in carrying a laptop then being alerted they should have taken extra reasonable skill and care. In other words, being aware of what they were carrying impose on them a greater duty of skill and care than they would be required to exercise, say, delivering a hairbrush. And then to top it all, – in case we need extra help – not only is their non-compensation list and their agreement to carry your laptop without any liability a breach of section 57, the use of a non-compensation list where they knowingly accept to carry those items and yet disclaim liability for their own failings is an unfair term contrary to the unfair terms provisions of the 2015 Act. Therefore I suggest   have a look at what I have suggested above. Ask questions. Make sure that you agree with everything. Everything is true and correct. Let us know if you think that there should be anything else or if anything should be left out
    • What the locals are reporting ... Ashfield Independents overtake Reform in Tory Wipe-out Telegraph poll A Savanta poll predicts a Labour win in Ashfield, and puts the Ashfield Independents in second place ahead of Reform’s incumbent Lee Anderson   General Election 2024 Archives - Ashfield Neighbour News ASHFIELD.NEIGHBOUR.NEWS    
    • Of course it is your decision whether or not to go down the "legal route" – but actually seeking advice from us is precisely what you would be doing except that you would be getting it for free. It's up to you if you want to find a solicitor who will ask you exactly the same questions as us except you will be paying £300 an hour or if you want to follow our advice free of charge. You do need to settle down and answer the questions that we put to you. If you get a solicitor you will be asked exactly the same questions but I suppose that because you are paying £300 an hour you will be happy to answer them or even volunteer the information in order to save time and therefore money. I suggest that you give us the information we are asking for and anything else that you think might be relevant. This way hopefully we can cut to the chase without wasting time. Do understand that by coming to us you haven't simply chanced upon a piece of social media here. This is not Facebook. We are very serious about what we are doing and we are taking you very seriously. We take everybody who comes to us very seriously.  
  • 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

Disappearing Holiday Entitlement - Employers Stating I've Taken More Than I Actually Have


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2836 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

Hi

 

I work for a small business which has no HR department. It's a combination of the administration manager and the finance department who deal with any HR related matters.

 

I'm leaving the company and have asked for a note of my remaining holiday entitlement. They are saying I have no remaining annual leave as I've taken it all. I haven't. I've only taken 5 days. They say I've taken 16 days (I wish). I can prove that I was in the office on the days they say I was on annual leave but it's a proving to be a battle. When I first handed in my notice I was told I had quite a bit of remaining leave. As soon as I say I want to use some of it, it disappears. Can they take away holiday entitlement? What are my rights as an employee if they refuse to correct their records?

 

The holiday year starts on the 1st April, I'm leaving in October.

 

This has happen before but with sick leave. I was reprimanded for taking too much sick leave after being off for 3 days with the flu. When I asked to see my sickness record they had me off for 8 days. Again I could prove I was in the office on the additional 5 days. They only corrected their records when I threaten to get the union involved. I don't want to do this again, I want to leave peacefully. It's a great company to work for, it's just a shame that the HR side is in a shambles.

 

I'm the only person who carries out the type of work I do. It does create problems when I'm not in the office. Holiday requests are a chore and when I do finally get a holiday my line manager is constantly on the phone and e-mail asking me to do work. Booked holidays are cancelled at the very last minute. Same with sickness. Those 3 days I took off, they were constantly checking on me each day. Even when I was sat in the doctor's reception - every 10 minutes, "have you seen the doctor yet?"!! My theory is the additional sick leave was a ploy to ensure I didn't take anymore sick leave in the fear I would lose my job. Needless to say, this disappearing holiday entitlement does not come as a surprise.

 

Thanks

 

B

Link to post
Share on other sites

how is the holiday recorded and by whom? Your records should match with theirs and if they say you were on holiday on such and such dates then it will be easy to prove that you werent.

What I would do is calculate your holiday entitlement from April to your leaving date, subtract the 5 days you took and then send them a demand for the holiday pay after you have left if there is a discrepancy in you final pay. If they agree that you are owed holiday take it at the end of your notice and that way you get the leave you are entitled to. If they dont you will need to send a lba and tell them that you are entitled to x hours pay for leave that was not taken ad they should pay this within the next calendar month or you will issue court proceedings to recover the money and any additional costs incurred.

your inclusion of sick leave in this thread is a red herring, do not even think of using that in any discussion or argument about holiday pay

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks ericsbrother

 

The holiday is recorded by the finance officer and the admin manager on an excel spreadsheet. Holiday approvals are via e-mail, which I keep therefore would be quite easy to match up. The finance officer, whose main responsibility this is, is on long term leave, so there is a strong possibility the admin manager has made a mistake. It's the latter that is adamant that the figure they have quoted is correct. The finance officer is usually quite reasonable and hopefully will return prior to my last day with the company.

 

I've taken your point on board with regards to the sick leave and can see that this is irrelevant to the holiday pay/leave. I included it as an example of how they've 'misrecorded' my leave in the past and how it's been very difficult to get them to admit to their mistakes. Following your advice I won't be raising this with them in my holiday discussion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

While it may seem like a great company, it really sounds like theyre fiddling the books. Especially since you say they have prior history doing the same thing.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...