Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • just to be clear here..... the DVLA do not send letters if a drivers licence address differs from any car's V5C that shows the same driver as it's registered keeper.
    • sorry she is a private individual, the cars are parking on her land. she can clamp the cars. only firms were outlawed from doing it bazza. thats what the victims of people dumping cars on their drives near airports did and they didn't not get prosecuted.    
    • The DVLA keeps two records of you. One as a driver and one for your car. If they differ you might find out in around a month when they will send you a reminder as well as to your other half for their car. If you receive nothing then you can be fairly sure that you were tailgating though wouldn't explain why they didn't pick up your car on one of drive past their cameras. However even if you do get a PCN later then your situation will not change. The current PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 which is the main law that covers private parking. It doesn't comply for two reasons. 1. Section 9 [2][a] states  (2)The notice must— (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates; The PCN states 47 minutes which are the arrival and departure times not the time you were actually parked. if you subtract the time you took to drive from the entrance. look for a parking place  park in it perhaps having to manoeuvre a couple of times to fit within the lines and unload the children reloading the children getting seat belts on  driving to the exit stopping for cars pedestrians on the way you may well find that the actual time you were parked was quite likely to be around ten minutes over the required time.  Motorists are allowed a MINIMUM of ten minutes Grace period [something that the rogues in the parking industry conveniently forget-the word minimum] . So it could be that you did not overstay. 2] Sectio9 [2][f]  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, 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; Your PCN does not include the words in brackets and in 2a the Act included the word "must". Another fail. What those failures mean is that MET cannot transfer the liability to pay the charge from the driver to the keeper. Only the driver is now liable which is why we recommend our members not to appeal. It is so easy to reveal who was driving by saying "when I parked the car" than "when the driver parked the car".  As long as they don't know who was driving they have little chance of winning in court. This is partly because Courts do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person. And because anyone with a valid motor insurance policy is able to drive your cars. It is a shame that you are too far away to get photos of the car park signage. It is often poor and quite often the parking rogues lose in Court on their poor signage alone. I hope hat you can now relax and not panic about the PCN. You will receive many letters from Met, their unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors threatening you with ever higher amounts of money. The poor dears have never read the Act which states quite clearly that the maximum sum that can be charged is the amount on the signs. The Act has only been in force for 12 years so it may take a  few more years for the penny to drop.  You can safely ignore everything they send you unless or until they send you a Letter of Claim. Just come back to us if they do send one of those love letters to you and we will advise on a snotty letter to send them. In the meantime go on and enjoy your life. Continue reading other threads and if you do get any worrying letters let us know. 
    • Hopefully the ANPR cameras didn't pick up the two vehicles, but I don't think you're out of the woods just yet. MET's "work" consists of sending out hundreds of these invoices every week so yours might be a few days behind your partner's. There is also the matter of Royal Mail.  I once sold two second-hand books to someone on eBay.  Weirdly the cost of sending them separately was less than the cost of sending them in one parcel.  So to save a few bob I sent them seperately.  One turned up the next day.  One arrived after four days.  They were  sent from the same post office at the same time! But let's hope I'm being too pessimistic. Please update us of any developments.
  • 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
      • 161 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

Salary not paid correctly?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 373 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

Hi all,

 

Contacting on behalf of my sister.

 

We are finding it hard to understand her wages this month (please see attached)

 

She is contracted to 40 hours a week with a set salary, how ever in recent months they have been deducting money from her contracted salary for illness days as she is pregnant and needed more time off than usual,

 

I havnt worked personally for a couple of years and was always on a hourly pay, but I think the whole of a salary is to ensure you have the same pay each month regardless to illness? 

 

Again please see attached.

 

Thank you

DOC-20230428-WA0003.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

I presume that's for month 01 as the cumulatives are the same as the monthly?

 

I think the total number of days she's had off sick in the previous 12 months might be relevant?

 

Do you know why there are separate deductions for both "Unpaid sick absence" AND "Unpaid absence"?

 

(I retired many years ago and unfortunately I'm not as familiar with payslips as I used to be)

  • I agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Manxman in exile said:

I presume that's for month 01 as the cumulatives are the same as the monthly?

 

 

My assumption too. It does say 'Tax Period 1' at the bottom and OP refers to it as "this month".  I assume it's for April 2023 and so the first month in 2023-24 tax year.

  • I agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, looks like sick pay is SSP and not full pay - she needs to get a copy of the sick absence policy.

  • I agree 1

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

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi please find attached,

 

I have done my best to take out name of work and names to hide identity, please if you come across anything that should not be visible to public please let me know so I can fix that, alot of time off was antenatal from complications of pregnancy.

 

Thank you guys sorry it took so long replying, it took a while to get the contract and I havnt been well.

 

Sorry for double comments,

 

I believe the pay rota is two weeks prior to the payslip so the dates of actual pay would be from week 20th March to week 14th possibly 17th April.

 

Question:

 

Do you know why there are separate deductions for both "Unpaid sick absence" AND "Unpaid absence"?

 

 

We are both finding it hard to understand this part also

 

employment contract.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

The contract is dated Dec 22, so according to the sick pay section she  doesn't have a years service and is only entitled to SSP.

 

A common way of showing that would be to deduct the days from salary, and add it back in again as SSP.

 

First 3 days of a sickness period aren't eligible for SSP so I am guessing that is the other absence on file.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

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

It looks ok to me, I would ask payroll to talk me through it if unsure. I don't know what codes they use for everything.

  • Thanks 2

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

18 hours ago, Emmzzi said:

It looks ok to me, I would ask payroll to talk me through it if unsure. I don't know what codes they use for everything.

 

This ^^^^^^^^.

 

If your friend isn't in a union - or doesn't have easy access to a union rep - then first port of call should always be to ask payroll for an explanation

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Sorry if I'm missing something here, but with all the sick periods being due to pregnancy / ante natal reasons, shouldn't the employer be reminded about their obligations about indirect sex discrimination?

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 02/06/2023 at 10:26, Nicky Boy said:

Sorry if I'm missing something here, but with all the sick periods being due to pregnancy / ante natal reasons, shouldn't the employer be reminded about their obligations about indirect sex discrimination?

Only if they were breaching them. They aren't.

 

WWW.DAVIDSONMORRIS.COM

Special rules apply when managing Pregnancy Related Sickness Absence. This guide summarises the key points for HR and managers.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

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...