Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hello I hope someone can give me some advice here, as I am at a bit of a loss on how to proceed. This relates to alleged offences under the RTA. Yesterday I received a notification from the local police of intention to prosecute for the following offences: 1 driving without due care and attention 2 failing to stop at a road traffic accident 3 failing to report a road traffic accident At this stage they have only asked me to say whether I was the driver at the time or not and provided a blank sheet of paper to give information about the incident. Going by the location (just round the corner from where I live) I can only imagine this relating to one recent incident, which wasn't actually an accident but more of a road rage event. I was driving past someone unloading or working next to his lorry which had stopped in the road. I wasn't going fast or anything, while I went by lorry man turned around and punched and kicked my car whilst going past him. I stopped and got out and wanted to know what he thought he was doing punching and kicking my car. He then hurled some verbal abuse at me, swearing and he was quite aggressive. I still didn't know what his problem was and said I would report him to his company for threatening behaviour and vandalism for punching my car. I got my phone and tried to take a photo of his lorry and number plate but at that moment he came right at me, still shouting and swearing, so I was worried he may hit me next, as he already punched my car. I thought if the guy hits me I will come off second best, so I decided to retreat. I quickly got back into my car and left. When I checked my phone later the photo I tried to take was blurred and useless, so I thought it was pointless to report the incident to the police, as the guy would not be traceable. Over that I forgot about it until I got the letter yesterday in the post. This is the only thing I believe this can relate to, but I have no idea based on what the three above allegations come from There was no road traffic accident, more of a road rage incident. So I am at a loss what to do. I have 28 days to respond. Should I just say yes I was the driver and was there and see what happens next, or should I already make a written statement on the attached piece of paper they sent me and send that with it ? Is there anyone here who would have a rough idea what to do next ? I tried my legal advice line through my Union, but they have sent me from pillar to post, now say it needs to go to a different department again and that would be chargeable as the RTA comes under Criminal Law. So any advice would be appreciated Many Thanks
    • So a quick update got bounced around two different departments and managed to speak to a DVLA bod , explained the situation and they could see the overlap and that DD payments had been made from Feb , also no formal remiders prior , they gave me a number for the legal dept who I am calling this morning to see what they can do in terms of the SJP notice , still have time to submit this online.  Will update after my chat this morning 
    • filed the defence at same time as suggested @dx100uk
    • Also, I am trying to understand how invoicing a large sum in a 6m period becomes tax fraud?   Is it because if he had invoiced over the £85k threshold he should have been obligated to charge vat?  Which would have meant hmrc would have benefited from the vat amount? So by not charging it Hmrc have lost out on £s revenue?  Is that what makes it tax fraud? So as a self-employed contractor, let's say he invoiced one Co for 200k.  Should he have charged vat on the full 200k (£40k)? Or just on the sum above the threshold (£23k)?  And that by not charging vat, he has knowingly withheld tax £s from Hmrc? And is the payer complicit ?
  • 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

Protected characteristics, and suspended from work, unfairly treated - now ET Claim


Recommended Posts

threads merged for history

dx

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

At the prelim hearing the judge will decide whether part or all of your claim can go ahead.

This may include a ruling on whether it was submitted within time.

  • 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

Thank you. I'm confident it's well within time.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote

we need to discuss the content of the report with you in regard to the impact that your medical condition has on your behaviour and to understand the impact that it may or may not have on your ongoing employment

Is this normal for an employer to ask an employee? 

Am I the only one who thinks this is overstepping the mark?

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it would be normal to ask, to understand your experience of how your health conditions impact you on a day to day basis, as well as interactions with others.

 

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

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you.

I can understand asking these at the beginning of the employment process when going through medicals and occ health. 

But nearly two years down the line? And with management who aren't medically qualified or have lived experience of my disability? 

Not withstanding the choice of language, "your behaviour "..... I'm 50 years old not 5.

This isn't to ask about any adjustments I may need to carry out my role, this is to question someone who is neurodiverse on how they would react to certain situations, and I believe this is so they can say I'm not suitable for the role I've been doing for 15 months.

I strongly doubt that other employees with MH issues and neurodiversity will have had to have been ridiculed and belittled in this way.

I don't understand what the aim of this meeting would be?

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

At what point in your employment did you mention your health conditions and ask about reasonable adjustments?

The point they appear to be getting at, is that the health conditions directly affect your ability to carry out the job you were employed to do.  And therefore they are needing to understand to what extent your health would hinder you.  It is not about them making any judgements about your health. They are wanting you to explain in your own words.

Behaviors are relevant whether someone is 18 or 68.

I think you need to go back to ACAS to get some further advice.

  • Thanks 1

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

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are expecting accommodations due to your health condition; you have previously stated it affects your behaviour and ability to participate in internal processes.

Of course it is completely reasonable for them to ask about it. How else can they make the adaptations you have said you need, or understand the context and reasons for your behaviour?

"Behaviour" is only a loaded word if you think your behaviour has been malicious. Otherwise - it's only a word that describes things that have been done.

What help are you getting with your stress/ anxiety? My observation is that you are seeing people against you at every turn. That must be exhausting. Time for your support network to kick in?

  • Like 2
  • 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

Thank you both for your valuable input, and I agree that I feel under attack.

It's taken almost 6 months to get them to acknowledge that I have a disability, I'm tired and not very well.

I'm due to start some therapy for the PTSD on the 18th of this month, AGAIN!!

Just spoke with ACAS and they are saying I am not obliged to discuss my disability with them unless I wish to do so on my terms, there can be no intrusive questions either, and that I need to be mindful of the employment tribunal prelim hearing in June.

I'm getting a call back from a legal helpline on Sunday regarding this. See what they advise.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am glad you have access to therapy.

I suggest that neither you nor your manager are the right people to give a definitive opinion on how your condition impacts you at work, and an occupational health referral to a specialist doctor would be what I would suggest/ agree to, if I were you.

I appreciate you may have done this before but it seems if there are unanswered questions, that is the way to get them answered without bias from either party creeping in.

 

  • Like 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

You need to be aware an employer can only make reasonable adjustments if you co-operate with them.

If you do not co-operate, they can make an objective decision on facts they know

That does not mean the employer can directly achieve it, but they can accomplish it through a third party, such as occupational health.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are not asking me  about reasonable adjustments. That's already been discussed. 

I agree, they should refer any questions they might have to a specialist. 

 

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

After taking legal advice, they agreed that this email should be produced in the employment tribunal as the choice of language used by HR is very questionable and verging on discrimination.

When I explained that I had just concluded my disciplinary hearing, which was a verbal warning, he said that this would be harassment and to lodge another formal grievance, I'm not going through that whitewash again.

However, unless it is a 'capability assessment' or to look at reasonable adjustments, then decline their offer. Which I have done so already.

Let's see what tomorrow's correspondence brings.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 07/04/2024 at 11:11, Bazooka Boo said:

After taking legal advice, they agreed that this email should be produced in the employment tribunal as the choice of language used by HR is very questionable and verging on discrimination.

When I explained that I had just concluded my disciplinary hearing, which was a verbal warning, he said that this would be harassment and to lodge another formal grievance, I'm not going through that whitewash again.

 

So... we are getting half the story again, but you do have legal counsel. As they will be getting the full story from you, I suggest you take their guidance, only.

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 don't have any legal counsel, I'll be doing this as a LiP.

All I've done is ask the house insurance legal advice line, who then passed me onto employment solicitors for advice regarding this one issue.

I'm not divulging the entire saga on a public forum because there is an employment tribunal pending, and whilst the employer and their HR team are doing a wonderful job of tripping themselves up and dropping themselves in it, I don't want to allow them to get their defence together using information off here.

I'll only be asking relevant questions to my particular issue as and when they arise, what I won't do, is bare all before the ET, and nail myself to the cross.

 

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

On Monday I had an "informal fact-finding meeting",  dressed up as reasonable adjustments.

It didn't go well, and when they were questioned about whether my comparator had sat through the same meeting, it turns out that no other employees are made to sit an 'informal fact finding meeting" before returning to work, the meeting was terminated.

ACAS advised calling the tribunal, and the court informed me that it can be added to the prelim hearing.

I'm speechless as to their continued blatant discrimination, it's absolutely incredible, and this is the head of HR!

 

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Had the grievance hearing last Friday regarding the 'informal fact-finding meeting', and hopefully find out the result by the end of the week.

I now need to inform them I deem the head of HR's conduct as harassment, although it's part of the claim with the PH in June, the number of emails he has churned out since October inferring I am lying and degrading me is quite staggering.

Had a really good webinar last Thursday with Valla, who clarified that almost all of the responses the respondents return always claim that you are out of time, and then go on to make out that your claim is full of untruths, the employer didn't do this that or other.....

Will wait and see what the first stage of this grievance will uphold? I'm not holding my breath...

 

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would just say, ask your most challenging friend to review the emails. Are they really inferring or is your perception clouded because of your mental state? For example; asking a question is not an inference.

I say this so you don't waste the court's time with minor hurts or imagined slights;  they want the significant elements. Otherwise their perception of you may be negative from the offset. 

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

No they are really inferring, it's in black and white.

My perception is correct. 

ACAS and a solicitor plus my therapist, who has had sight of the language used by the head of HR, have all come to the same conclusion as I.

I can't be responsible for the Courts perception of me, that's none of my business. 

Hopefully this grievance will go some way to address their behaviour.

Thanks once again for your opinion...

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I would only rely on your solicitor in this regard. The other two should not have a view.

 

And, you are responsible for how the court perceive you. They only have your words and deeds to go on. Expecting them to magically see things your way is not a great tactic.

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

Thank god you're not a part of the tribunal!

Terribly biased and negative. 

HR isn't all knowing. And this case proves it.

Thanks again for your opinion. 

I'm not going to court because of a few emails, I'm going to court because the head of HR has invented a PCP solely for me, which no other employee is made to sit.

The language used in the emails is discriminatory and inflammatory. 

 

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

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...