Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hello, welcome to CAG. I imagine the letter that the security guards talked about will be a letter from a company or lawyers who specialise in trying to extract money from shoplifters. I think Sainsbury's use DWF solicitors, otherwise it could be a company like RLP. It won't be a 'fine', only the police can do that. Look at this as a parallel 'justice' system that doesn't involve the plice. If you read around the forum for other cases of shoplifting, you'll get the idea of how this all works. If you think your behaviour has become compulsive, we suggest having a chat with your GP who should get you help for this. Best, HB
    • despite our wettest 18 months on record,  Low levels of rain and snow have cut Canada’s hydropower production, forcing it to increase electricity imports from the U.S.   - NYT
    • Hi all…. i was wondering if someone could help me. I am ashamed I have been caught shoplifting from Sainsbury’s by two undercover security guards who I suspect have been following me for a week now… I have been impulsively shoplifting due to what I think could have become an addiction of some kind. I am ashamed of what I had been doing and I do believe being caught has been for the greater good. i was taken to a room and asked to empty my bag, the guards were slightly rude but I complied with them politely as I know they are just doing their job and I am in the wrong. They retrieved my address, name, birthdate and took a photo of me, they asked me how many times I had shoplifted and I said twice and I didn’t want to be foolish and say just once. They issued me a letter of ban from the store and if I was caught in the store again the police would be called. They told me I would be paying 2x what I had stolen today as the goods had been damage which I am guessing is stole around £65 worth roughly. I did offer to pay for the items I had stolen on the day but they declined. They did not call the police but let me leave after claiming I was a lucky person. They told me to expect a letter in the post and that I “would be smart not to ignore it”  what should I be expecting in the post from them? I am aware from reading a lot online about security costs.. people mentioned to ignore these costs however as I had damaged the labelling on the goods should I still comply and pay the fines ?  kind regards awful shoplifter
    • If you're sat there wondering how to attract and retain young talent, look no further. Find out what young people want from employers.View the full article
    • Toyota has apologised for providing incorrect or manipulated data for safety certification tests.View the full article
  • 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

Business Mileage - Home to Work


lewis94
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2768 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

I wonder if anyone can help as I am not finding the correct information anywhere or getting confusing answers.

 

I have an employee that is claiming mileage to visit a clients offices.

As I understand it he can claim from the normal place of work to the client offices but not from home direct to the clients offices.

 

I have tried to look on HMRC but it doesnt really help.

The contract with the client says reasonable expenses are to be paid,

therefore mileage could be recovered,

however they too have raised the query on why they are paying from his home.

Any thoughts please?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe you are correct. If the distance from home to the client is longer then they have a legitimate gripe.

 

Thank you. Would anyone have a link to any useful website that could confirm

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello there.

 

When I was involved with this last, the company said that if someone went from home to a client meeting, they would deduct the distance from home to the office from the outward journey, if you see what I mean.

 

I'm not clear from your first post about who isn't happy with this, could you tell us a little bit more please?

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The journey from home to your normal place of business is a commute rather than business miles so not claimable. Playing hard rules until you're at your normal place of work to set out to a client it isn't a business journey. It's HMRC rules so it should be on their website.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The client isnt happy and I agree, however the employee doesnt.

This is why employers end up playing hardball and insisting employees do their normal commute into work before going out to clients. The client didn't contract with your employee to travel from wherever they choose to live, they contracted with your company at your normal place of business.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the distance from home to the client is longer then from home to work the employee can claim the difference in mileage.

 

So if the commute to work is 10 miles and the commute to the client is 12 miles they can claim the 2 miles.

 

If they go to the normal place of work first and then to the client they can then claim from and to the place of work.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't think HMRC tell you where your employee can claim from to that degree, that's probably a contractual matter. HMRC just set figures for allowances for travelling business miles. I imagine the employee was being paid from the time they left home? Or did you want them to come to work first, to start the clock running? What's the benefit in the argument? If the employee only works a set amount of hours in a day, isn't it beneficial to get them to drive straight to the client than coming to work first?

Link to post
Share on other sites

HMRC rules can be applied no matter what the employment contract says.

 

If the employment contract stipulates payments below the HMRC levels or any difference to the HMRC approved mileage guidelines, then a claim can be made to HMRC directly for the difference via a tax return.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Or did you want them to come to work first, to start the clock running? What's the benefit in the argument? If the employee only works a set amount of hours in a day, isn't it beneficial to get them to drive straight to the client than coming to work first?

In many cases it is beneficial but the distance of the commute to the 'normal place of business' cannot be claimed. It's because it causes such argument that employers do get to the point of insisting all business journeys start from the office.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...