Jump to content
We are now - The National Consumer Service ×


  • Tweets

    No tweets were found.

  • Posts

  • 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
      • 162 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
        • Thanks
        • Like

Recommended Posts

Hello everybody, I was wondering if anyone can give me any advice regarding the situation I was in.

 

Less than a year ago, I was pushed into resigning from my post within a large government body so as to avoid being caught up in a disciplinary inferno. I resigned, under pressure from senior management, from my post with immediate effect, on the 23rd of the calendar month. My wages were paid on the 30th as standard.

 

About 6 weeks later I received a letter from my former employer's Pay section advising that as my resingation had not been received in time for the payroll processing, I had been overpaid by around £220 net. At this time i had still not been paid the considerable amount of leave I had been owed; when I put this in writing to them, they stated that it was my responsibility to chase up leave owed to me and that any overpayment would be deducted from the leave payments owed.

 

I received correspondence from ther senior manager of my site advising me of what leave they believed i was entitled to; it was less than my own calculations and records had indicated, but given that I was keen to move on with my life and put everything behind me, I did not reply to this and believed the matter to be concluded. I received payment for this, and assumed the overpayment had been cleared.

 

However before Christmas I received a strongly worded letter from my former employer stating that I had still not paid, and threatening legal action. I replied stating that I had made arrangements regarding the leave owed to me, however I have now received a reply stating that the leave paid to me did not have the overpayment deducted due to an error by staff in Pay section.

 

Right now I would like to know where i stand regarding possible legal action they can take against me. I'm thinking of writing in demanding a full audit of the records of leave and flexi taken by me in order to challenge the amount they stated I was owed, but I want to know what exactly their chances of winning a case against me are should they try and take me to court.

 

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome to the site :-)

 

Firstly, you are fully entitled to query the amount which they claim that you owe, and you should make your own calculations to compare with their figures. Ask for a detailed breakdown of the amounts before agreeing to anything.

 

As to whether they can win a case against you? That depends on the credibility of their evidence. As with any County Court action to recover a debt, you have a right to challenge the claim, disagree with the amount and defend your position. Your position will be so much the stronger if you can demonstrate errors in their calculations, and the fact that they were unwilling to consider any attempt on your part to correct them.

 

They are probably bluffing on the leagal action at present, but ultimately yes, they could sue to recover the alleged debt.

Any advice given is done so on the assumption that recipients will also take professional advice where appropriate.

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

DONATE HERE

 

If I have been helpful in any way - please feel free to click on the STAR to the left!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that.

 

I've written a letter to them asking for me leave taken over the time I worked there to be recounted; I know I had a manual record on my desk, so they should be able to make use of that.

 

From experience of friends working in finance, they advised me that the chances of me being sued for £200 odd are quite small, but with the government you never really know. From experience, given that the initial overpayment and the subsequent failure to collect when previously arranged to do so were as a result of their errors, would that have any impact on a court case?

Link to post
Share on other sites

That would depend on how vigorously you were prepared to defend it. If the error was one of fact as would seem to be the case here (ie a mistake in calculating the salary) then there would be a greater argument for you to repay, although you could then argue a change of position - basically spent the money, believing that you were entitled to it and had been given good reason to believe that you were entitled to it.

 

The question there would be whether the amount was such that you could reasonably have known that you were overpaid, so clearly the issues over holiday would be relevant, as it might be reasonable to assume that the pay was correct based on what you calculated to be your outstanding entitlement.

 

I am inclined to agree that Court action for £200 might not be worth their while unless they were very sure of success, although stranger things have happened.

Any advice given is done so on the assumption that recipients will also take professional advice where appropriate.

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

DONATE HERE

 

If I have been helpful in any way - please feel free to click on the STAR to the left!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

... although you could then argue a change of position - basically spent the money, believing that you were entitled to it and had been given good reason to believe that you were entitled to it.

 

.

 

Just to add that in reality this defence works best if there is no current income to pay back the debt. If the OP were in work, then it would have less chance of succeeding, as the courts tend to combine "couldn't have known / spent it in good faith / and can't pay it back"

Link to post
Share on other sites

When I left central government they miscalculated my leave, making it less than my calculations, they did this because the formula they used was incorrect, they paid me what they felt was due but after much toing and froing they eventually agreed with me. This looks like it could possibly be the same, I think I still have the email calculations somewhere and will have to dig them out and clean them up for you to see how I worked out where they were wrong.

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...