Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Work from home is "an aberration" that will be corrected as soon as possible says Goldman Sachs chief. View the full article
    • Work from home is "an aberration" that will be corrected as soon as possible says Goldman Sachs chief. View the full article
    • The mini electric vehicle being made by China's biggest carmaker is now outselling Tesla two to one. View the full article
    • https://www.bindmans.com/news/neale-v-dpp-the-right-to-silence-citizens-duties-and-coronavirus-regulations   Perhaps the OP should have said nothing - and risked arrest!   "Firstly, the case calls into question the logic behind aspects of the criminal justice response to the public health crisis created by the Coronavirus pandemic...   "Secondly, it is clear that some police officers have misunderstood and misstated their powers, and citizens’ obligations, under the Regulations and at common law...   "Thirdly, the case confirms reasonable excuses for being outside are not limited to those explicitly set out in the Regulations. Police officers considering whether there are reasonable grounds for believing that an offence has been committed under the Regulations so that an FPN may be issued, or the reasonable grounds for suspicion that are necessary for an arrest, should give proper consideration to any explanation given by members of the public (and what a court might think of them) rather than only recognising those exceptions explicitly listed in the Regulations and/or government guidance...   Fourthly, the case is an example of a failure of the CPS review into prosecutions brought under Coronavirus Regulations, which has found that alarming numbers of cases were wrongly charged..."   Above quotes from the Bindman's article, not the decision.  Case arose from the first lockdown and was in Wales.  Same now?  Also was about not being at home - not mask wearing.    
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 33 replies

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1052 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

Hubby and son both worked PAYE for the same construction firm always away from home so traveling expense's and meal allowance were paid separate to wages lodge was paid direct to hotel by the company

 

they came to him one Friday and informed them that they weren't going to pay hotel anymore but they would give them £25 a day for digs (jobs in London) this was to start on the Monday

 

Hubby and son handed in their notice and had to travel every day to the job (well they didn't have to but felt they should work the notice week to keep everything right)

 

As this is a construction site the company tools were taken from site buy my hubby and son at the company's request

 

they have not been paid their last weeks expense's and want them to be paid in cash when they drop the tools off (firm doesn't have a good payment record with sub contractors) hubby and son have told them pay the expense's and wee will drop of the tool

 

It has got to the stage that they have given them 3 days to drop off the tools or they will take them to court

 

I'm not sure how we stand with this any help guidance would be appreciated

I have e-mailed them and told them to come and collect their tools and drop of the payment due

Link to post
Share on other sites

They need to write to the company and state that the are willing to return the tools at the same time they get paid.

If they want to take them to court they would have to explain why they wanted to withhold payment of the wages and didn't agree to pay the wages at the same time they got the tools back.

The judge won't be impressed.

However, as the tools belong to the company, if they report a theft to the police, hubby and son might get a visit from a pro active pc, but as it goes, on hearing that wages are outstanding, most likely the police favourite punch line would come up "civil matter" and they would leave it at that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

IMO the payment of Wages and the Return of Company Property are 2 separate issues and need to be treated as such

 

1. If they do not pay their wages then they would need to go through the process of taking them to court for those wages.

 

2. The Companies Property - They has asked for this to be returned by a certain time limit and if this is not done the Company would then have to go through the process of taking them to court for recovery of that property at the same time they may also report that property as stolen/theft to the Police.

How to Upload Documents/Images on CAG - **INSTRUCTIONS CLICK HERE**

FORUM RULES - Please ensure to read these before posting **FORUM RULES CLICK HERE**

I cannot give any advice by PM - If you provide a link to your Thread then I will be happy to offer advice there.

I advise to the best of my ability, but I am not a qualified professional, benefits lawyer nor Welfare Rights Adviser.

Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...