Announcements
-
-
Tweets
-
Posts
-
By ConcernedPerson2222 · Posted
Any thoughts on the threat they are making there, and whether its more or less likely to be a scare tactic? -
By honeybee13 · Posted
Emmzzi is right, we don't recommend advice by PM. As she rightly says, it's better that advice is made in public and peer-reviewed. HB -
Personally I would work out what I was owed and go to small claims court; it's faster than an ET and shoud you lose the fees are smaller. Thank you for your DM: I do prefer to comment on a public thread because I am not perfect and extra eyes to catch anything I miss are always helpful. -
Right here it is - Ill be checking back throughout the night to make any amendments to our WS Clmt ws redacted (1).pdf -
By ConcernedPerson2222 · Posted
Just an update, when going in to sign my payslip they seemed to not expect me. Then I said I was told to be here fore that, and they said it was just being done right then and if I would like to wait. I said I would come back the next day. I brought my father the following day, and they would not answer the door for a while. They cracked open the door to see who it was and spotted my father, closing it. The buzzer was held down and they eventually answered and had us sit in the waiting room. They would have been aware this was my father. After 5-10 minutes they called me specifically into the next room. I did so and they closed the door, which I then got up and opened so that my father could be present as witness. The manager who closed the door seemed shocked by this, saying she has to go and "sign him in" and she went off for 30 seconds before coming back. I asked why I did not have to be signed in, to no response. They were not smiling. I asked where the payslip was, and they instead began by saying that they were conducting an investigation on me for slander of the company. The manager was then questioned by my father, saying that he had experience as a manager and knows you cannot investigate ex-employees. The cracked a smile and said that I was never employed, but self-employed. This got the same response from my father, which saw "Well, if that's what you think..." in return. Throughout the exchange my father kept asking when I would be getting paid, which was always countered with the fact this "investigation" with no definite end was ongoing. They also said they would get back to me whether they will decide to take it further. My father told me to leave, and that this was about them avoiding being able to pay me. This may be the case as they were likely aware that debits charged to me would have been listed on the payslip, and that I had asked for the justification for each debit to be listed. Alternatively, this company is notorious for taking customers to court, and it was remarked by then new staff that they had an insane amount of ongoing court cases and that they had never seen a company more aggressive when it came to chasing customers for money. Thus far I had gotten an overview to trading standards (sans the company identity until I got confirmation I would be anonymous) , but concerns over anonymity and the impact of having a record/court case could have on future career prospects prevented me from following up to proscribed bodies or the employment tribunal. I have been told by friends and family this is likely scare tactics intended to frighten me out of remembering I should be paid. However, they may force my hand here. What is the best course of action?
-
-
Our picks
-
If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,
If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.-
- 1 reply
-
-
Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld
ATJ posted a topic in Big Motoring World,
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
-
-
A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report
WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,
Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299-
- 162 replies
-
-
Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available
BankFodder posted a post in a topic,
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
-
-
We are now - The National Consumer Service
-
Recently Browsing 0 Caggers
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
Have we helped you ...?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.