Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I've had another look at their WS and as it definitely states that they are pursuing you as the keeper in point 19 they must lose their case because their PCN is not compliant with PoFA on two counts.  First is the fact that they must have a parking period and it is quite clear that entering and leaving the car park does not constitute a parking period since some of the time the motorist is either driving around looking for a parking spot then leaving the spot and driving to the exit. All that takes time so that is one fail. The other fail is in their wording when they are trying to transfer the liability of the alleged debt from the driver to the keeper. They are supposed to include at Schedule 4 s9 [2][f] this "(if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met)". That in itself makes it non compliant but the fact that they haven't got a parking period means they haven't met the applicable conditions.   Looking at their contract, the names of the signatories and their positions in their respective  companys have been redacted. You do need strict proof of who actually signed. There is no specific authorisation from the Client to allow Court action in pursuit of non payers. In section 11 which is like an addendum it states" the Company shall provide parking control" but doesn't state if that includes legal pursuit as well and it does not appear to be signed.   The entrance sign does not include the T&Cs so it is only an offer to treat  not  an offer of a contract. Their only appears to be one type of sign inside the car park which is unusual and a lot of the signage is in too small a print to be acceptable in Law as capable of forming a contract. The signage also includes unlawful demands for extra charges which makes the whole contract invalid.  PoFA 2012 made it quite clear that the maximum  amount claimed was the amount on the sign. This has been reinforced by the Private Parking Code of Practice which states that no extra charges can be made over the signage figure. Indeed a Government Minister is quoted as saying that the extra charges demanded by parking companies are "a rip off" yet they still include them. They are an abuse of process and should be subject to adding exemplary costs payable to the motorist to act as a deterrent to rogue car parking companies.   They have no planning permission for their signs and ANPR cameras which means that in addition to them being unlawful because of the extra charges they are also illegal because they have not been given permission to be there under  the Town and Country [Advertisements} Regulations  1969. They are supposed to comply with the Law and the IPC code of Conduct and they have done neither. The new Private Parking Code of Practice  draws attention to it as well  s14.1 [g]  "g) responsibility for obtaining relevant consents e.g. planning or advertising consents relating to signs."   So it is not as if this is a secret-since it has been out since February 7th 2022 . You would have thought that as this Code was designed to root out the rogues in the industry that the parking industry would already have made adjustments to their activities in order to align themselves with the will of Parliament as proposed by Minister Neil O'Brien  who said   "The publication of this Code therefore marks the start of an adjustment period in which parking companies will be expected to follow as many of these new rules as possible."   Ignorance of the Law is no excuse but even Gladstones are surely aware that the extra charges are unlawful  it beggars belief that they can aver that they have told the truth on their WS.
    • Evening all,   I am looking for a little bit of advice, any would be appreciated. I am a bit hesitant in giving all the in's and out's as I am not sure of the forums procedures and I do not want to compromise my situation.   Basically as a result of a few issues in my life inflicted/self inflicted I ended up in a bad situation financially. A company brought a debt off a lender I had used and took me to court, I really mis-managed this and although I attended court with a case the verdict went against me. I accepted this but never heard anything back from them and admittedly as I was struggling didn't pro actively seek them out to make payment. So, on my Credit report I had a CCJ due to expire Sept. 2022, which I associated to that particular incident. Anyhow, I have recently received a Notice of Application for Attachment of earnings order, however, this is regarding a completely different debt/Court procedure to the one I participated in. The creditor, to my knowledge has never contacted me and until this week I have never received any correspondence to this case from the creditor or county court.    Basically, I was just after a bit of advice, on how to go about this. I am worried that if my employer is advised of the CCJ, it makes my position uncomfortable, maybe untenable which will only be negative to my situation.    So can I still contest this and possibly get it removed via the courts, can I delay it for 3 months to get it statue barred, do I pay the whole amount (to a company whom brought it at a pittance) or do pay it off and if so, can the figure be negotiated and how long would it affect me credit score?   I apologise for the number of questions, and appreciate any advice. My concern is the application ruining a very good job for me.   Thanks in advance
    • Thanks, I am worried because on the citizenship application they ask if I received warning, I am not sure if TFL warning this the same police warning or not?? 
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Sick pay in notice period

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 431 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


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



Recommended Posts

Hi Everyone, 


Just a quick question on behalf of my mum.. 


Shes worked for the same GP practice for around 20 years now. It got taken over around 5 years ago by a big company who now own several GP practices in our area. The company have never been great / treated staff great but my mums stuck with them.


Recently the company have had a lot of staff leave and all the work was getting put on my mum. They just kept putting more work onto her to cover for those that had left amongst other things. Things finally came to a head last week and she realised she needed a break. For the first time in many years she knew she had to put a sick note in because she was getting to the point of dreading going which she’s never done before. She’s not been sleeping and she’s mentioned to them her concerns about the work not getting done / piling up and they just don’t care enough.


So she put a self cert in for a week and then during this week decided it was time to leave, she’s very experienced in what she does and is just not valued in the slightest. She put her notice in and then the company sent an email out saying just to let you know we don’t pay sick pay during notice period if you put your notice in. Is this right? I mean she’s never hardly ever been off sick so we don’t really get all the ins and out but it just seems really harsh.

She’s always paid into the union every month but they’re not getting back to her I’m assuming they’re very busy with Covid. 

It could absolutely be right whst they’re doing but I just thought it was worth another opinion. 

Thank you 

Link to post
Share on other sites



I expect people will be along to comment later. I'm not an employment person but this doesn't sound right to me - even though your mum has given in her notice, she's still employed.


Can you tell us what your mum's contract says about sick pay and especially sick pay during a notice period if it's in there please?



Illegitimi non carborundum




Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, thanks for your reply. 

She’s been onto the company handbook and it says under pay and benefits.. 


“Additionally company sick pay may be withheld in the following cases” and then one of them is -  

When the employee is working their notice period. 

So I get that it does state that but I just thought I would check if it is correct. 

Thank you 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Would have normal entitlements during notice period including any sick pay.  The employment contract would state notice period required and during this period to not pay for days not worked due to sickness would seem very wrong.


Although it is stated in the contract does not make it legally sound. It says "may" be witheld which suggests that it is discretionary.  What I think this is trying to protect against in someone not working a day of their notice period without a Doctors fit not stating a condition. For example the employee may leave before supplying the fit note.


Next step is to contact Doctors for a fit note stating period unable to work due to x condition and to submit to employers.


Suggest also contacting ACAS for advice on this.




We could do with some help from you.



 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group


If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites


  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...