Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 4 th time we've merged your threads  for complete history of your story please keeps to one thread
    • @dx100uk @ anyone else interested in Fighting HSBC UK  Staff/department non compliance and incompetence/interference in between HSBC UK and customers.   I wanted to know what you guys had to say about the reply i got from HSBC UK today.    Recap. I originally turned to HSBC UK to be reunited with Money i saved in accounts that where frozen and made dormant during the year 1995.   HSBC UK Teams tell me that HSBC UK only allows them to have access to account records dated back 6 years. there for they do not have the records, can not locate the records i requested for in my SAR. there for HSBC UK teams Ignored my SAR application for records of accounts made frozen and dormant during the year 1995. HSBC then claim if the accounts where closed they will no longer hold records of these accounts and tell that to the ICO. I again explained to HSBC UK and the ICO the records of accounts where left frozen and dormant.   HSBC UK teams continue to tell me over the phone that The records i requested for in my SAR, will not be located or do not exist because HSBC only allows them to have access to records of accounts dated back 6 years.    I returned to HSBC highlighting there is no such provision in the Data Protection Act.   HSBC UK teams today totally ignored my complaint again and confirmed with me they are classing my complaint as wanting to locate accounts that where closed.   Let me know what you think about the  HSBC UK teams response to my last complaint. Is there any other letters i can send them to confirm thay are not correct about what they have done.    The HSBC UK letter starts of by:You've been unable to recover funds you held in HSBC UK Accounts that were closed in 1994 to 1995, and to obtain the account details for the accounts concerned. You've been advised that we only retain records for up to 6 years, but you've been unable to locate any provision for this within the Data Protection Act (DPA). You require a Certificate of Destruction from HSBC UK to evidence the destruction of the data concerned. You feel your Subject Access Request (SAR) has been ignored by HSBC UK.   HSBC UK Teams now go on to explain: In respect of you being advised we only retain records for up to 6 years, but having been unable to locate any  provision for this within the Data Protection Act (DPA), I can confirm that under the DPA, we are obliged to only keep records for as long as we deem necessary, in order to effectively manage our data. So, for most cases, this will be for no more than 6 years.   In regards to your request for a Certificate of Destruction from HSBC UK to evidence the destruction of the data concerned, I regret that this isn't something that we can provide, as we don't keep records of when individual customer data was destroyed. I'd also like to clarify that if the accounts concerned were closed after becoming dormant, that we would have sent you closing statements at the time.   Lastly, I'm sorry you feel we've ignored your SAR. I want to assure you that we'll always look to accommodate a request for a SAR as best as we can. However, if we're unable to locate the account details and information required, this will mean we're unable to fulfil the request, which has unfortunately been the case on this occasion.   How else do you think i can highlight to HSBC that the teams dealing with My complaint, and request to be reunited with my money is not going to departments that can deal with my demand for services.?  
    • Hi   I have to agree if you have paid off the debt owed to them via this meter and are up to date on your bills  I would look at changing supplier and as said asking new supplier to install a standard meter and look for the best deals for you.
    • I have severe anxiety and going to leave my job and have been invited to a meeting but dont wish to attend that is three hours away from where I am. Can I legally give the  permission to decide without my being there? I cannot handle going as I know I'm going to be fired anyway as on my final warning. I'm also giving in my notice this week too! This job is just too much for me now and I cannot work here any longer. It's no good for my health and sanity  I am sick to my stomach thinking about going and about to hand my notice in anyway    
    • Thankyou it’s because I’m awaiting the outcome and a friend said I will be turned down as I asked them a while back if I had ppi on the account and how much it was and they replied.  But they did only send me a short confirmation with the amount and that they trust that answers my enquiry. i just wanted to be prepared if they wouldn’t turn me down based on that. Thanks for your advice on that mate 
  • Our picks

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1108 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Does anyone have any thoughts or comments regarding this weeks tribunal decision whereby judges ruled that Uber drivers were employees, not self-employed?

 

There were some very hard hitting comments from the judges regarding the company.

 

An estimated £314 million has been lost in tax and national insurance contributions every year, whilst this operation has been on going.

 

I am personally delighted and it is companies like Uber who are responsible for so many of their workers being driven into debt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello and welcome to CAG.

 

Why are you delighted please?

 

My best,

 

HB


Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Honeybee.

 

Thank you for the welcome.

 

I am delighted because Uber were creating what is known as false self employment. Their drivers were effectively employees but were acting as self employed. It meant that Uber evaded paying millions of pounds in NI contributions that could have gone into an already impoverished National Health Service. Uber also evaded their employers obligations to their drivers. These drivers have none of the rights that most people take for granted and can be dropped at a minutes notice. When that happens, debt is not far behind.

 

HMRC are able to issue hefty fines on companies who abuse the worker status but their resources are limited. The more cases like this that are successful, the less likely these greedy employers are likely to try these short cuts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

cld it set a precedent re other areas, eg courier co's continuously using the same self employed drivers?


IMO

:-):rant:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It could have interesting ramifications.

 

I would be interested to know the root of the legislation that the lawyers used.

 

Would it be EU led legislation?

 

Oh wait, we screwed that didnt wr


Any opinion I give is from personal experience .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cld it set a precedent re other areas, eg courier co's continuously using the same self employed drivers?

 

It won't set a precedent as an employment tribunal decision. Only when a case goes to an employment tribunal appeal would it be a precedent (much in the same way that case law is). There are several precedents out there already. Most employers are now aware of the risks and use the legal (but wholly immoral) loophole of an umbrella company. However, the pressure is even on these companies to operate correctly otherwise they will leave themselves open to similar claims.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It could have interesting ramifications.

 

I would be interested to know the root of the legislation that the lawyers used.

 

Would it be EU led legislation?

 

Oh wait, we screwed that didnt wr

 

I would start with the Employment Rights Act 1996 and the Working Time Regulations 1998

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It won't set a precedent as an employment tribunal decision. Only when a case goes to an employment tribunal appeal would it be a precedent (much in the same way that case law is). There are several precedents out there already. Most employers are now aware of the risks and use the legal (but wholly immoral) loophole of an umbrella company. However, the pressure is even on these companies to operate correctly otherwise they will leave themselves open to similar claims.

yes, wrong choice of word. meant generally, as perhaps as you say re 'similar claims' re yr last sentence.


IMO

:-):rant:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not followed this case, but read the papers.

Do uber drivers use their own car?

If not, uber is definitely taking the mickey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they are not employees but "workers" which is different. Yes they use their own cars but so do care workers transporting little old ladies to the shops as part of their duties.

Uber claim self-employed but how the work is handed out and who controls the money and other things mean that the tribunal found it easy to make that decision. Yes, most companies like couriers and telecoms who send out people in vans and issue work and then claim the person driving THEIR van is somehow self-employed will be worried and rightly so. This is not about zero hours contracts, although all of these classes of worker are on that contract, it is about what real freedoms the people have to decide what jobs they accept. because people pay Uber when they book a cab and Uber decide who gets the work and then has performance mileposts to reach it cannot be said that drivers are self-employed or they would be running a one person band and not part of this outfit.

Uber hate it because they make a lot of money and do almost nothing for their cut and now they will ahve to pay employers NI, pension contributions and other benefits that any other zero hours contract worker has a right to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...