Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • be very wary upon what you see being recently posted on here 😎 regarding KIH.... all is not what it seems...  
    • 1st - all my posts on CAG are made not only in reply to the specific issue the topic starter makes but also in a general matter to advise any future readers upon the related subject - here it is kings interhigh online school. KIH lets take this topic apart shall we so readers know the real situation and the real truth...and underline the correct way to deal with KIH. https://tinyurl.com/ycxb4fk7 Kings Interhigh Online School issues - Training and Apprenticeships - Consumer Action Group - but did not ever reply to the last post.  but the user then went around every existing topic here on CAG about KIH pointing to the above topic and the 'want' to make some form of group  promoting some  'class action' against KIH . then on the 2nd march this very topic this msg is in was created. all remarkably similar eh? all appear to be or state..they are in spain... ....as well as the earlier post flaunting their linkedin ID, (same profile picture) that might have slipped through via email before our admin killed it.., trying to give some kind of legitimacy to their 'credentials' of being 'an honest poster'....oh and some kind of 'zen' website using a .co.uk  address (when in spain- bit like the Chinese ebay sallers) they run ... and now we get the father of the bride ...no sorry...father of a child at the uk-based international school in question posting ...pretending to be not the 'other alf... do you really think people are that stupid..... ................... nope you never owed that in the 1st place... wake up you got had and grabbed the phone - oh no they are taking me to court under UK jurisdiction...and fell for every trick in the book that they would never ever put in writing that could be placed in front of a court operating under their stated uk jurisdiction wherever you live. T&C's are always challengeable under UK law this very site would not exist if it were not for the +£Bn's bank charges reclaiming from 2006> and latterly the +£Bn's of PPI reclaiming both directly stated in the banks' T&C's were they claimed they were legally enforceable ...not!! they lost big time... why? a waste of more money if you've not got a court claim....... why not use them for a good outcome...go reclaim that £1000 refundable deposit you got scammed out of . people please research very carefully ...you never know who any of these people are that are posting about kings interhigh and their 'stories' they could even be one of their online tutors or a shill . don't get taken in. dx      
    • @KingsParent thank you for sharing your experience.  I also tried contacting the CEO but didn’t get very far. Do you mind sharing his contact details?  kind regards   
    • Thank you Rocky for the clarifications though they did cause a problem at first since an original windsccreen ticket was  of a different breach some time before. The current windscreen ticket only states that you were parked there for 6 minutes which is just one minute over the minimum time allowed as the Consideration period. There is no further proof that you parked there for any longer than that is there? More photographs for example? Moving on to the Notice to Keeper-it does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. First there is no parking period mentioned on it. there is the time 20.25 stated which coincides with the W/S ticket but a parking period must have a starting and finishing time-just one time is insufficient to qualify as a parking  period as required in Section 9 [2] [a] . Are there any different photos shown on the NTK comapared to the w/s PCN? Not that that would make a difference as far as PoFA goes since the times required by PoFA should be on the NTK but at the moment Met only appear to show that you stayed there for 6 minutes. Another failure to comply with PoFA is at S9([2][e] where their wording should be "the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; ". You can see on your NTK that they misssed off the words in brackets. Met cannot therefore transfer the charge from the driver to the keeper. Only the driver is now liable. Then their is the discrepancy with the post code on the NTK  HA4 0EY which differs from the post code on the contract and the Post Office Postcode Finder which both list it as HA4 0FY. As you were not parked in HA4 0EY the breach did not occur. In the same way as if you were caught speeding in the Mall in London, yet you were charged with speeding in Pall mall London [a street nearby] you would be found not guilty since though you were speeding you were not speeding in Pall Mall. I bow to Eric's brother on his reasoning on post 12 re the electric bay abuse  That wording is not listed on their signs nor is there any mention on the contract of any electric charging points at all let alone who can park there or use them. He is quite right too that the entrance sign is merely an invitaion to treat it cannot form a contrct with motorists. Also the contract looks extremely  short no doubt there will be more when we see the full Witness statement. As it stands there is no confirmation from Standard Life [or Lift !] on the contract that Savills are able to act on their behalf. Also most contracts are signed at the end of the contract to prevent either side adding extra points. So their percentage  chance of winning their case would be somewhere between 0.01 and 0.02.    
    • @dx100uk no, haven’t received any correspondence as of yet. Still waiting on a court date but seems to be taking forever. Have noticed an increase in unhappy customers on here
  • 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
      • 160 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

Workplace Harassment


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 446 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

Hello,

 

My 18 year old daughter has worked for an Agency at the same workplace for around 5 months and has had a number of occasions which amount to Harassment possibly Sexual but the line when it becomes Sexual Harassment is unclear to us. The client who recruit through the agency are aware of at least 3 occasions prior to the latest incident.

 

On the last incident a colleague who was sat near her at their work station moved across to her, put his hand on her thigh and then put his other arm around her, she tried to move away but he wouldn’t release his arm from around her and another colleague had to shout at him 3 times to get off her before he did. The following day she went back to work and became scared and upset in the first few hours because the person was constantly staring at her and his girlfriend and her friends were also acting towards my daughter in a threatening manner.

 

I eventually had to go to the workplace as my daughter was scared and upset and nobody was around to get help. A Team Leader became involved and took my daughter to an office where a Formal Complaint was prepared and then sent to the Agency & Workplace HR. 

 

After having her 4 days off due to the shift pattern she returned to work and straight away noticed that the accused person was on site and started glaring at her as soon as he saw her, this made her frightened and upset and again she had to leave site. She let her agency know if this and they said that the investigation had been carried out and the matter was closed but they would invite her to a meeting to chat over it and update her on what had been done to keep her safe.

 

she went for the meeting but it wasn’t as she thought, she was taken to the HR Managers office (Clients) who started to question her about the incident and at the end they said that they would now need to conduct a full investigation due to what had been said, this is what my daughter thought had already been done.

 

This means that for 4 days nothing had been resolved on site or actions taken to ensure the safety of my daughter which I find is unacceptable, nobody had contacted my daughter during the 5 days after submitting the FC to even ask how she is or to reassure her and they were happy for her to return to the site as if nothing had happened.

 

My daughter is now losing out financially because of this as she is to scared to go to the workplace as the accused is still continuing to be there and no action has been taken by either the Agency or Client .

 

My frustration is who is responsible to deal with the Formal Complaint as both parties are involved, is there a breach of her terms of employment, how should it be handled and by who.

 

She is also raising a report with the Police about the matter.

 

Any advice gratefully received.

Edited by dx100uk
formatting
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think she is employed by the agency - is that what her contract says?

 

She could ask the agency in writing what they are doing to ensure she is not harassed at work, and also to pay wages until such a time as they have guaranteed a space workspace for her.

 

Or, she could ask the agency for work elsewhere.

 

Personally I would find now be contacting other employers to seek work elsewhere, as both the agency and the workplace have demonstrated they have no intention of taking this seriously. It's rotten to the core, but you can exhaust yourself going down a legal route. She has to look after herself.

 

And, she should join a union at her next workplace. They tend to be better at handling matters like this as a collective.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking it was the Agency to resolve until the HR Manager for the workplace questioned my daughter then said they would need to investigate fully.

Both the Agency and Workplace have a duty of care for all workers and would be linked Contractually for employment rights.

 

My daughter wanted to keep working there until she found other work but was unable too due to the situation she faced when returning and the fact that no process had been followed to ensure she was safe.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, nicurro said:

I was thinking it was the Agency to resolve until the HR Manager for the workplace questioned my daughter then said they would need to investigate fully.

Both the Agency and Workplace have a duty of care for all workers and would be linked Contractually for employment rights.

 

I couldn't comment om that without seeing the contract. There are many kinds of agency agreements.

 

Do you have legal cover on your house insurance? It is worth checking the policy.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, nicurro said:

Pretty sure we have legal cover on house insurance policy.

Great place to start.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

I have to agree with Emmzzi on this

 

The behaviour of the Agency and the Employer she is working for have shown they don't want to take such a matter seriously.

 

As your daughter is working for an Agency her actual employer is the Agency not the client the employer she was sent by the Agency to work for so the Agency should have been taking this matter seriously and investigating it properly.

 

Yes the Agency would notify the employer she was  placed with and they would also need to carry out an investigation and is probably why that employers HR Manager spoke with her as part of that employers investigation but she will be unaware of anything they have done before hand i.e. spoke with those employees concerned and what they said.

 

IMO after this she really needs to make sure she is signed up to a Union and also with the actions of this Agency she needs to find another Agency or get her CV out to other companies in the specific field she wishes to work. Even since restrictions are getting lifted look in the local area and go round prospective companies and drop off a CV.

 

Please don't let this episode affect your Daughter in the area she wishes to work 

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

Thanks Stu007.

 

I understand what you are saying and the fact is they haven’t as an Employer followed a process thoroughly.

A further complaint has been raised with the Agency HR Manager and I believe that they will be unaware of how the issue has been dealt with by the site agency representatives who confirmed that the matter had been investigated and closed, this was before she was asked to go to a meeting about the matter.

The invitation to the meeting was to chat it over with the Agency site team not to be questioned by the clients HR Manager.

This meeting did not give my daughter any time to prepare for it and this became very stressful for her.

she was even asked if she typed out the complaint as it had speeding and gramma errors, for what reason I don’t know but she replied by saying it was a Team Leader Employed by the client who did it.

An HR Manager should know better than this and also trained in this area to ensure that appropriate action and due process is followed.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pause, and stop thinking about legal rights and obligations.

 

I get that you are angry.

 

what is the best thing which can happen for your daughter now, which she has control over?

 

you cannot force the agency to behave well.

 

Remember HR are there for the employer, not the employee. Don’t expect them to be your champion.

 

what is the best thing for your daughter, where she can control the outcome?

Edited by Emmzzi

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

The best thing would be for her to feel able to go back to the workplace and feel safe.

Is this too much to ask ?

 

What are you saying, stop working and punish yourself financially and for her to accept it was her fault?


Surely Agencies/Employers have to do better even when they won’t allow unions on site?

 

International Women’s Day must be a waste if this is the case.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The ideal outcome, the law, and reality, almost never line up.

 

what did your insurers say?

 

Edited by Emmzzi

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...

open

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, we have now received an offer to settle before the tribunal though I am unsure of the full meaning of this statement and how to proceed with the offer as it seems a little low.

Without prejudice except in relation to an application for costs to be paid by the Claimant”

 
Any advice appreciated

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can’t advise without knowing who has made the offer, what the contract said, and what your claim was for.

 

You’re missing huge chunks of information out here.

 

Edited by Emmzzi

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

The offer is being made for commercial reasons from one of the respondents on the condition that all claims are dropped against all parties, the next para says “The offer is made on condition that all terms of an agreement can be agreed”

 

does this help ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

That means they don’t think she has a case but it’s cheaper to pay her off than defend it. They won’t pay out unless she waives her right to bring more cases.

 

you need a view from your own lawyer on the strength of her case.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...