Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Different statements. One has “at 59 mph overtaking on the approach” and the other “it was overtaking on the approach and in ....... at 49 mph”. So not the same statement (same ethos, different sentence structure).   perhaps they chose that site for the officer because it is an accident hotspot, and they know people do dodgy overtakes (while speeding) there .....??  
    • Hi.   I've moved your thread to the Bailiffs forum. People should be along to advise later.   HB
    • So a little update;   Of the 6 letters I sent 3 were acknowledged. One accepting £1/month for now and two from the same creditor trading under different names asking for full I&E which I haven't done.   In a moment of madness I managed to depsoit 5k to a gambling site I didn't have due to paypal's crazy policy of allowing payments which are to be collected by direct debit after a couple of days to gambling sites! Mad they allow this but this will show as a negative paypal balance (in a different account to the original "debt"). The first paypal -£5k account has been closed and passed to a DCA now. I have ignored them.   My council has appeared to have stepped up their collection efforts for £2.5k in alleged housing benefit overpayment from 2015/16. I have acknowledged their letters over the past 3 years each time by email but they rarely respond to my pleas. I truly think if there was overpayment then it was for less than half the amount they claim. At the time I didn't think I was being overpaid because I wasn't really working but I had stopped claiming JSA/ESA (and told them as much) but earned a couple of hundred pounds a month from sporadic work.   Also what I thought was a dormant debt from 2016 to Halifax has been actually sold ( to caboot? I think. Hard to keep track of everyone)   I've been getting phone calls daily but ignoring them for the most part. I did request all communication in writing in my original letters.   I feel incapable of dealing with these creditors and whilst initially I was feeling that I would be happy to just ignore all the letters (arreas, defaults and the like) and phone calls for an indefinite amount of time and  hope to make it 6 years to statute barred-ness and accept or defend any CCJ attempts that did arrive. I figured that avoiding these creditors for 3 months so far is 5% of the way there to statute barred! But I figre for these fairly sizeable amounts they probably won't all let it go and I will get some CCJ docs (never had to deal with that) However now my mood and thinking has changed.    I am looking again at insolvency. I'm over the DRO limit now so its BR or nothing. I was wondering why you said to not consider this and it would be stupid @dx100uk? Although shirking my debts/responsibilities it does seem like an "easy" way out at the moment. It would be so nice to know that what's done is done and to be able to draw a line in the sand and start again in a year or so and not have to avoid creditors or worry about what's coming next...   It certainly would help the environment what with the amount of letters that are arriving already(!) considering the first payment I missed was october/november (excluding the old halifax and council debts). I am exordinately stressed about it now even though I thought I would be already . Any advice would be great if it was to get my head out of the sand and contact people/do the ignoring thing and seeing what happens/reasons  to do or not to do bankruptcy for these unsecured debts?   Thanks      
    • Hi everybody   Had a knock on my door and was confronted by either a Bailiff or enforcement agent (not sure about the specific job title). When I opened the door he stuck his foot in so I couldn't close the door. I was video taping him so I took a few steps backward (to get him in shot) and he just fully entered the property despite me saying that I was denying him entry and he refused to leave thereafter.   Turns out that he was there to collect a court issued fine. I think from a Magistrates Court. He worked for this outfit:   www.marstonholdings.co.uk   The reason for the fine was something to do with "driving without car insurance". Now I had a cheap car a few years ago but it broke down and would cost more to fix than it was actually worth. So I sold the car for scrap and cancelled the insurance. Turns out you have to inform the DVLA when you scrap a car and them that it is no longer on the road (I was unaware). So this was the circumstances of the visit.   My question is did he have the lawful right to enter the property? I always thought these people were like vampires i.e. they can only come in if you invite them in.   tia Bear  
    • oppss again then if its the same person.   knows the road well so should know what the speeds are and where they apply..      
  • Our picks

labrat

Redundancy or relocation?

Recommended Posts

This might get a bit confusing as asking for someone 

 

My father in law has just been dragged into a meeting to say his branch is closing, as such he's been given until the 30th to decide if he wants to move

 

However he works for Andrew page, they want him to move to euro car parts - as such they have said they will send him his p45 and then he gets a new contract

 

Personally he would prefer redundancy as he's in his 60's and has 12 years service - they have told him its not an option despite all but two staff being told their being made redundant 

 

The letter is attached 

 

Any advice? 

 

 

IMG_20191016_183812.pdf


Please note:

 

  • I am employed in the IT sector of a high street retail chain but am not posting in any official capacity,so therefore any comments,suggestions or opinions are expressly personal ones and should not be viewed as an endorsement or with agreement of any company.
  • i am not legal trained in any form.
  • I have many experiences in life and do often use these in my posts

if ive been helpful kick my scales, if ive been unhelpful kick the scales of the person more helpful :eek:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

if they're redeploying him, it's not a P45 - that's if they are laying him off (with a payment!). So I think they are confused about what they are doing He needs to be really careful not to accept a change of employer and break in service with no compensation! Are both companies the same legal entity?

 

How far away distance and time wise is the proposed new office, and is the job essentially the same? Trying to work out if it is "suitable alternative employment."

 

The law is generally designed to keep people *in* work so be aware this may not go the way he wishes....

 


Never assume anyone on the internet is who they say they are. Only rely on advice from insured professionals you have paid for!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

deleted as wrong

Edited by Emmzzi
incorrect advice

Never assume anyone on the internet is who they say they are. Only rely on advice from insured professionals you have paid for!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's not in a union and can't afford a lawyer 

 

New job is actually across the road but they are adament that a p45 is needed 


Please note:

 

  • I am employed in the IT sector of a high street retail chain but am not posting in any official capacity,so therefore any comments,suggestions or opinions are expressly personal ones and should not be viewed as an endorsement or with agreement of any company.
  • i am not legal trained in any form.
  • I have many experiences in life and do often use these in my posts

if ive been helpful kick my scales, if ive been unhelpful kick the scales of the person more helpful :eek:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok. I didn't realise the letter was more than one page so I see he has it in writing that they are respecting his continuity of service.

 

No grounds for challenge I am afraid. Really minor changes; totally reasonable ask.


Never assume anyone on the internet is who they say they are. Only rely on advice from insured professionals you have paid for!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you 

 

I thought it might be the case but was hoping otherwise


Please note:

 

  • I am employed in the IT sector of a high street retail chain but am not posting in any official capacity,so therefore any comments,suggestions or opinions are expressly personal ones and should not be viewed as an endorsement or with agreement of any company.
  • i am not legal trained in any form.
  • I have many experiences in life and do often use these in my posts

if ive been helpful kick my scales, if ive been unhelpful kick the scales of the person more helpful :eek:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

broadly; why would they pay to lay him off, when he will probably retire soon and cost them nothing?


Never assume anyone on the internet is who they say they are. Only rely on advice from insured professionals you have paid for!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know but it's the in laws and promised I would ask

 

It just seems really odd that the entire branch has been made redundant other than FIL and one other 


Please note:

 

  • I am employed in the IT sector of a high street retail chain but am not posting in any official capacity,so therefore any comments,suggestions or opinions are expressly personal ones and should not be viewed as an endorsement or with agreement of any company.
  • i am not legal trained in any form.
  • I have many experiences in life and do often use these in my posts

if ive been helpful kick my scales, if ive been unhelpful kick the scales of the person more helpful :eek:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

has he asked for the selection criteria?  does his selection seem reasonable given the criteria? Mind you it's only helpful if someone being laid off wants to stay instead.


Never assume anyone on the internet is who they say they are. Only rely on advice from insured professionals you have paid for!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi labrat.

 

Emmzzi's the expert here, but could it be that your FiL would be more expensive to lay off/make redundant than the other people?

 

HB


Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think all in all he will end up moving 

 

The redundancy would have been handy is all


Please note:

 

  • I am employed in the IT sector of a high street retail chain but am not posting in any official capacity,so therefore any comments,suggestions or opinions are expressly personal ones and should not be viewed as an endorsement or with agreement of any company.
  • i am not legal trained in any form.
  • I have many experiences in life and do often use these in my posts

if ive been helpful kick my scales, if ive been unhelpful kick the scales of the person more helpful :eek:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As it is moving just across the road and his employment is protected he cant complain. Of course they dont want to pay out to make him redundant BUT if t is continuouse employment then they dont need to issue a P45 if the company he is leaving is a sunsidiary of the newco. What he should get is a new contract and that will be more than just the usual terms of service, it should cover things like any residaul laibilities such as pension rights, occupational diseases etc. If that isnt offered he shopuld see an employment solicitoer to poke them with a stick to get them to do it properly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...