Solicitors In - Being Made Redundant?

Worried about redundancy?

Top 10 tips

If you are one of the unlucky employees of the one in three companies making redundancies, it is vital to know your rights – otherwise you may find yourself unfairly dismissed. Your employer has two obligations – the company should have fair reasons for making you redundant and they must follow a fair process.

1 Warning

First, you should receive a letter warning you of potential redundancies. The letter should make it clear that no decisions have been made yet, but explain the reasons why the business is considering this approach.

2 Consultation

To decide who will be made redundant your employer should draw up selection criteria, for which you will be given marks. You should meet with your employer to discuss the situation and explore ways of avoiding the redundancies.

3 The Meeting

You are entitled to bring along a trade union representative or work colleague if you wish. In your meeting you are entitled to ask what the selection criteria is and what marks you have received. You are entitled to challenge this and you should focus your efforts on getting your skills across to your employer.

4 Assisting your employer with solutions

At this stage a decision should not yet have been made and your employer should still be exploring ways to avoid making redundancies. You should participate fully in the process. You can assist your employer to avoid making you redundant by offering solutions such as taking a sabbatical or working part-time.

5 If the employer decides to proceed with your redundancy, what can you do?

If an alternative solution is unviable and your employer decides to proceed with redundancy then you will be invited to a final meeting. Your employer will run through your redundancy package and, again, you can be accompanied by a trade union representative or a colleague.

6 The decision should be in writing

The decision should be confirmed in writing together with the termination date. You should also be offered the opportunity to appeal the decision.

7 Appealing the decision

If you decide to appeal your employer's decision you should be invited to a further meeting to explain why you disagree.

8 When you are made redundant what should your financial package be?

If you are made redundant you are entitled to three payments: A full notice period, a redundancy payment and unclaimed holiday leave.

Full Notice Pay You are entitled to your full notice pay which is usually in your contract, but in the absence of such a provision you can receive statutory notice.

Redundancy Pay There is a statutory amount payable calculated using a specific formula but it is also worthwhile checking whether you have a contractual entitlement to an enhanced redundancy payment. Click here to work out your statutory entitlement.

Unclaimed Holiday Leave You are also entitled to payment for any accrued, but untaken holiday.

9 What to do if you have been treated unfairly

If you feel you have been treated differently from other employees you should consult an employment solicitor as early as possible. There is a time limit of three months from the day you were dismissed to launch a challenge.

10 Reasons for appeal

Anyone who is made redundant should appeal the decision. Failure to do so could mean that any compensation received, should you win your case at a tribunal, is reduced by between 10% and 50%. If your employer did not take the requisite steps in the redundancy procedure or the selection criteria were discriminatory then you could have a case for unfair dismissal. Examples are if there was not a genuine need for redundancy and misapplication of objective criteria. Selection criteria meanwhile are not defined under law but decided upon by your employer, must be performance based and avoid any criteria that may be deemed discriminatory. Under new age discrimination a "last in, first out" policy is no longer permissible. You should consult your employer's policies and procedures guidelines to help get an idea of whether you have a case.

For a List of Local Solicitors please follow this link:
Solicitors in Maidenhead

Article Reference: takelegaladvice .com/news-and-information/legal-articles/Employment/Redundancies/Redundancy-Employment-solicitors-explain-your-rights/

Photo: gad123.files .wordpress.com/2007/10/redundancy_protection_14.jpg

 

Solicitors In London - Offer Advice on Money Laundering

New proof of identity requirements when instructing all solicitors
Money Laundering Regulations

Solicitors, like many other advisers, are required by the Money Laundering Regulations to obtain proof of identity of clients or potential clients at the start of an instruction. You will probably be used to being asked for proof of identification from accountants or banks as well as from solicitors.

From 15 December 2007 regulations came into effect which require a change to our procedures. We now have to carry out "Customer Due Diligence" before we can agree to act for you. This means that we need to obtain evidence of identity and address and check that evidence before we agree to act for you. For most people, that will mean that we will need you to bring evidence of identity (such as a current passport or photographic driving licence) and evidence of address (in the form of a recent Council Tax bill and recent utility bill or bank statement) to our initial meeting.

The Regulations also require us to identify "beneficial owners" and "controllers".

For a Limited Company we will need:-

* Evidence of identity and address of at least 2 directors: and
* A list of the names and addresses of all shareholders, as well as confirmation of their voting rights.

For a partnership we will need:-

* A list of all partners; and
* Evidence of identity and address for at least 2 of the partners; and
* A copy of the current partnership deed or some other partnership document that confirms who owns the equity and the voting rights of the partners

For a trust we will need:-

* A list of all of the trustees;
* A copy of the document establishing the trust and appointing the current trustees: and
* A list of the beneficiaries of the trust (names, ages and addresses) with confirmation of their share of the equity

We may require you to provide further information and evidence of identity of shareholders, partners or beneficiaries depending on the circumstances. These changes will apply to some existing clients as well as new clients.

To minimise any delay caused by the need to comply with the Regulations please let us have the relevant documents as soon as possible. Unfortunately, we are unable to accept instructions until we have obtained all of the necessary evidence of identity.

For a List of Local Solicitors please follow this link:
Solicitors in London

Article Reference: footanstey .com/index.cfm/solicitors/About.Instruct

Photo: anu. edu.au/sas/enrolments/_images/studentcard.jpg
 

 

Solicitors In - CCTV Release

CCTV procedure for the release of evidence

This article is referenced from: croydon.gov.uk

Some may regard it as the most potent infringement of their liberty. If users, owners and managers of these systems are to command the respect and support of the general public, they must be used with the utmost probity at all times, and in a manner which stands up to scrutiny and accountability to the people they are aiming to protect.

We believe that the people's private and family life should be respected. Although the use of CCTV cameras has become widely accepted in the UK as an effective security tool, those people who do express concern tend to do so over the handling of the information (data) which the system gathers.

After considerable research and consultation, a nationally recommended standard has been adopted by the system owners.
General policy

All requests for the release of data shall be channeled through the data controller or his nominated representative.
Primary request to view data
Requests to view CCTV data are likely to be made by third parties for any one or more of the following purposes:

* providing evidence in criminal proceedings
* providing evidence in civil proceedings or tribunals
* the prevention of crime
* the investigation and detection of crime (may include identification of offenders)
* identification of witnesses

Third parties, which are required to show adequate grounds for disclosure of data within the above criteria, may include, but are not limited to:

* police
* statutory authorities with powers to prosecute, (eg. Customs and Excise; Trading Standards, etc)
* solicitors
* claimants in civil proceedings
* accused persons or defendants in criminal proceedings
* other agencies, (as agreed by the Data Controller and notified to the Information Commissioner) according to purpose and legal status

Upon receipt from a third party of a bona fide request for the release of data, the data controller shall:

* not unduly obstruct a third party investigation to verify the existence of relevant data.
* ensure the retention of data which may be relevant to a request, but which may be pending application for, or the issue of, a court order or subpoena. A time limit shall be imposed on such retention, which will be notified at the time of the request.

Where requests fall outside the terms of disclosure and Subject Access legislation, the data controller, or nominated representative, shall:

* be satisfied that there is no connection with any existing data held by the police in connection with the same investigation.
* treat all such enquiries with strict confidentiality.

Secondary request to view data

A 'secondary' request for access to data may be defined as any request being made which does not fall into the category of a primary request.
Before complying with a secondary request, the data controller shall ensure that:

* the request does not contravene, and that compliance with the request would not breach, current relevant legislation, (eg. Data Protection Act 1998, Human Rights Act 1998, section 163 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, etc);
* any legislative requirements have been complied with, (e.g. the requirements of the Data Protection Act 1998);
* due regard has been taken of any known case law (current or past) which may be relevant, (eg. R v Brentwood BC ex p. Peck); and
* the request would pass a test of 'disclosure in the public interest'.

If, in compliance with a secondary request to view data, a decision is taken to release material to a third party, the following safeguards shall be put in place before surrendering the material:

* in respect of material to be released under the auspices of 'crime prevention', written agreement to the release of the material should be obtained from a police officer, not below the rank of Inspector. The officer should have personal knowledge of the circumstances of the crime/s to be prevented and an understanding of the CCTV System Code of Practice.
* if the material is to be released under the auspices of 'public well being, health or safety', written agreement to the release of material should be obtained from a senior officer within the Local Authority. The officer should have personal knowledge of the potential benefit to be derived from releasing the material and an understanding of the CCTV System Code of Practice.

Recorded material may be used for bona fide training purposes such as police or staff training. Under no circumstances will recorded material be released for commercial sale of material for training or entertainment purposes.
Individual subject access under Data Protection legislation
Under the terms of Data Protection legislation, individual access to personal data, of which that individual is the data subject, must be permitted providing:

* the request is made in writing;
* a specified fee is paid for each individual search;
* the data controller is supplied with sufficient information to satisfy him or her self as to the identity of the person making the request;
* the person making the request provides sufficient and accurate information about the time, date and place to enable the data controller to locate the information which that person seeks, (it is recognised that a person making a request is unlikely to know the precise time. Under those circumstances it is suggested that within one hour of accuracy would be a reasonable requirement);
* the person making the request is only shown information relevant to that particular search and which contains personal data of her or him self only, unless all other individuals who may be identified from the same information have consented to the disclosure.

In the event of the data controller complying with a request to supply a copy of the data to the subject, only data pertaining to the individual should be copied, (all other personal data which may facilitate the identification of any other person should be concealed or erased). Under these circumstances an additional fee may be payable.

The data controller is entitled to refuse an individual request to view data under these provisions if insufficient or inaccurate information is provided, however every effort should be made to comply with subject access procedures and each request should be treated on its own merit.
In addition to the principles contained within the Data Protection legislation, the data controller should be satisfied that the data is:

* not currently and, as far as can be reasonably ascertained, not likely to become, part of a 'live' criminal investigation;
* not currently and, as far as can be reasonably ascertained, not likely to become, relevant to civil proceedings;
* not the subject of a complaint or dispute which has not been actioned;
* the original data and that the audit trail has been maintained;
* not removed or copied without proper authority;
* for individual disclosure only (i.e. to be disclosed to a named subject).

Process of disclosure

Verify the accuracy of the request.

Replay the data to the requester only, (or responsible person acting on behalf of the person making the request).

The viewing should take place in a separate room and not in the control or monitoring area. Only data which is specific to the search request shall be shown.

It must not be possible to identify any other individual from the information being shown, (any such information will be blanked-out, either by means of electronic screening or manual editing on the monitor screen).

If a copy of the material is requested and there is no on-site means of editing out other personal data, then the material shall be sent to an editing house for processing prior to being sent to the requestee.
Media disclosure
In the event of a request from the media for access to recorded material, the procedures outlined under 'secondary request to view data' shall be followed. If material is to be released the following procedures shall be adopted:

* the release of the material must be accompanied by a signed release document that clearly states what the data will be used for and sets out the limits on its use, and indemnifies the partnership against any breaches of the legislation.
* the release form shall state that the receiver must process the data in a manner prescribed by the data controller, e.g. specific identities/data that must not be revealed.
* it shall require that proof of any editing must be passed back to the data controller, either for approval or final consent, prior to its intended use by the media (protecting the position of the data controller who would be responsible for any infringement of Data Protection legislation and the System's Code of Practice).
* the release form shall be considered a contract and signed by both parties.

For a List of Local Solicitors please follow this link:
Solicitors in Croydon

Article Reference: croydon .gov.uk/advice/legaladvice/cctv/

Photo: mbugs.files.wordpress .com/2009/04/cctv-camera-636.jpg
 

 

Solicitors In - Legal Update

Legal Updates
Optical radiation directive

From April 2010 new UK Regulations are planned to transpose EU Physical Agents Directive (Artificial Optical Radiation) and will apply where workers are exposed to ultraviolet radiation, infrared radiation, visible light and lasers. Exposure to natural sunlight is NOT within the scope of the directive, neither does the directive apply to members of the public

Requirements will include assessment of worker exposure against exposure limit values (ELV's – based on current ICNIRP recommendations) including, where necessary, measuring/calculating exposure levels and consideration of particularly sensitive risk groups. Likelihood of exceeding ELV's will trigger the need for an action plan of how exposure above the limits will be prevented. Risk from exposure also triggers info/training requirements and where appropriate, health surveillance.

Impact on the BBC and the media/entertainment industry in general will depend on whether exposure from studio/location/theatre lighting is likely to exceed ELVs. Industry led research is currently underway to find this out. As far as use of lasers is concerned the new legislation is not expected to significantly alter safety standards that are currently best practice anyway within the media industry and required under existing general legal requirements.

The potential hazards associated with exposure are damage to the skin and/or eyes, including photo-retinitis (blue light over-exposure). The risks from lasers and UV light are well known but there is currently no related ill-health history for studio or location lighting.

For a List of Local Solicitors please follow this link:
Conveyancing Solicitors in the UK

Article Reference: http://www.bbc.co.uk/safety/default.aspxpage2925.shtml

Photo: http://www.ptb.de/en/org/3/37/373/gleitstiel.jpg
 

 

Solicitors In - Economical Credibility Gap...

'Credibility gap': The thought doesn't count

"gosh, I can't vote Tory" - Quote below

It wasn't so long ago that the prime minister was drawing battles lines for the election between Labour investment and "Tory cuts". Now, it's Conservative profligacy versus Labour austerity and restraint.

Or that's today's message, anyway. No doubt there will be another worthy skirmish between the major parties tomorrow (sigh).

The chancellor says that the Tories have made pledges to raise spending or cut taxes worth at least £45bn a year by the end of the next parliament - but offered only £11bn in tax rises and spending cuts to pay for them.

If you don't believe him, he's got a 150-page document to show you, costing each and every Tory aspiration.

I'm sure the numbers are right, as far as they go.

But - with apologies to the poor souls who had to come up with all of those pages - the numbers aren't the issue. The issue is whether any of this is Tory policy, and whether any of it would actually be implemented by any Conservative administration on the timetable that Darling's document suggests.

The Conservatives have been quick to jump on the "dodgy dossier" - there's a detailed rebuttal due to land in my inbox any minute. David Cameron claimed to have seen at least £11bn wrong with the paper in the first seconds of looking at it.

For example, to get the £45bn figure. Labour has thrown in nearly £5bn in tax cuts for married couples, and another £5bn from abolishing stamp duty on shares. Yet the Tories have have not made any detailed policy pledges in either area, as is perhaps demonstrated by the fact that the Labour researchers only throw these tax cuts into the last year of a putative Tory parliament in their calculations.

This happens rather a lot in the course of those 150 pages: not having a firm commitment from any minister, the authors assume that a given tax cut or spending increase will only happen in 2014-15. The result is the so-called "credibility gap" goes up from £13bn in 2013-14 to £34bn in just one year.

Labour says this shows them being "generous" with the Conservatives - because the cost would be that much greater if the changes were assumed to be implemented any earlier. You could also say it shows the arbitrariness of the entire exercise.

I don't think people will come away from this thinking: "gosh, I can't vote Tory - they're going to be throwing too much tax-payer money around". Labour wouldn't want anyone to think that either.

But it's true that there have been a number of not-quite-pledges in the rhetoric of senior Tories over the past year - like the talk of tax cuts for married couples, or reversing the 50p rate for top earners. Here and elsewhere, they have wanted to gain credit for aspiration, without having to pay for it.

Yet, to coin a phrase, it's not the thought that counts.

The only message that Labour wanted to get across with this document is that you can't have your cake and cut it too. To the extent that the Conservatives are now forced to clarify what they have and have not promised for a Tory first term, I suspect Labour will consider this first big day of the 2010 campaign a success.

In fact, no sooner had I written those words than the Chief Secretary of the Treasury, Liam Byrne, called me to say he was "not unhappy" that the Tory leader had already come out denying that these were formal pledges. It's a question of trust, he said, which Labour is planning to keep running with, right through the next few months.

Which is all fine and dandy. But there are risks to this particular credibility game.

The first is that, while voters are unlikely ever to think of the Conservatives as profligate spenders, all the talk of uncosted pledges makes it that much harder for Labour to paint the Conservatives as the party of reckless spending cuts (whatever the true differences between the parties).

The other is that pre-election slanging matches involving big headline numbers can come back to haunt you.

At the last election, Labour said that Conservative policies would involve a £35bn cut in spending on public services, and spent most of the campaign going on about it. But using the same (rather flawed) methodology, the IFS has calculated that Labour now plans a cut of more than £80bn.

In the coming months, you can bank on the Conservatives to make as much hay with that big headline number as they possibly can.

Stephanie Flanders

BBC NEWS

For a List of Local Solicitors please follow this link:
Find Conveyancing Solicitors in the UK

Article Reference: bbc .co.uk/blogs/thereporters/stephanieflanders/2010/01/the_thought_doesnt_count.html

Photo: newsimg. bbc.co.uk/media/images/47029000/jpg/_47029655_cameron226ap.jpg
 

 

Solicitors In - Charity and VAT Problems

VAT tribunal can hear point on legitimate expectation

Chancery Division

Published December 31, 2009

Oxfam v Commissioners for Revenue and Customs

Before Mr Justice Sales

Judgment November 27, 2009

An argument by a taxpayer based on the doctrine of legitimate expectation was one which could properly be raised on an appeal to the VAT and Duties Tribunal for recovery of input value-added tax.

Mr Justice Sales so stated in the Chancery Division when dismissing an appeal by the taxpayer, Oxfam, from a decision of a VAT and Duties Tribunal, dated July 30, 2008, whereby it upheld the refusal by the Commissioners for Revenue and Customs to allow in full a claim by Oxfam for repayment of certain input tax under section 83(1)(c) of the Value Added Tax Act 1994.

Mr David Milne, QC and Mr Richard Vallat, instructed by Saffery Champness, chartered accountants, for Oxfam; Ms Sarah Moore for the commissioners.

MR JUSTICE SALES said that issues of contract law, under rules of general private law, legitimate expectation, under rules of general public law, and application of general rules of tax law all arose.

The parties and the tribunal agreed that the tribunal had jurisdiction to deal with the contract law; that was correct. However, the parties thought that the tribunal did not have jurisdiction to consider Oxfam's alternative legitimate expectation argument.

His Lordship's view was that that was not correct. There was no good reason for adopting a different approach to the interpretation of the jurisdiction of the tribunal in section 83.

Therefore, apart from any authority on the question, his Lordship would hold that section 83(1)(c) bore its ordinary and natural meaning, so that resolution of the issue of legitimate expectation which arose between Oxfam and the Revenue fell within the tribunal's jurisdiction.

His Lordship referred to cases at the level of the tribunal and in the High Court, including Customs and Excise Commissioners v National Westminster Bank plc ([2003] STC 1072 paragraphs 46-56) and held that he was not bound by authority to reach a contrary conclusion.

His Lordship was conscious that a procedural point of importance was involved and that he was departing from a widely held view that the tribunal's jurisdiction was more limited.

Until the issue was authoritatively ruled upon at a high level the prudent course for a taxpayer who wished on public law grounds to challenge a decision of the Revenue falling within the scope of one of the headings in section 83 might be to seek to put forward such grounds in the course of an appeal to the tribunal, but at the same time to issue a protective judicial review claim within time in case it was later determined that the tribunal had no jurisdiction in the matter.

Solicitor: Solicitor, Revenue and Customs.

For a List of Local Solicitors please follow this link:
Qualified Solicitors in the UK

Article Reference: business.timesonline .co.uk/tol/business/law/reports/article6965317.ece

Photo: static.guim .co.uk/Guardian/lifeandstyle/gallery/2008/may/08/ethicalfashion.fashion/oxfam3-2027.jpg
 

 

Solicitors in - Volume Case

Apple off the hook over iPod volumes

Apple won a legal victory today when a US appeals court ruled that the American technology group was not to blame if iPod owners damage their hearing by playing their music too loudly.

The judge upheld a 2008 ruling that the iPod was not directly responsible for hearing loss despite users being able to crank up the volume to a potentially dangerous level of 115 decibels.

He said that the two claimants in the case had not proved that hearing loss was "actual or imminent" when using an iPod and had not alleged that the music player had failed to do anything that it had been designed to do.

The complaint was initially filed by the aptly named Joseph Birdsong in Louisiana before another complainant, Bruce Waggoner, also joined the suit.

The pair had argued that the iPod's earphones were designed to be placed in the ear canal rather than over the ears, increasing the prospects of hearing loss, and that the popular music device lacked any noise isolating or cancelling properties.

However, the judge presiding over the appeal in Northern California ruled that all the plaintiffs had proved was that iPod users could use the device in a risky way if they chose to, effectively placing the burden of responsibility for any hearing loss on the customer.

The ruling is yet more positive news for Apple, which has sold 220 million iPods since it launched the digital music player in 2001, and comes in advance of its expected launch of the iSlate "tablet" computer in January.

The California-based company's shares hit a record high this week on hope that a touch-screen handheld computer on which Apple has been working for several years under the supervision of its chief executive, Steve Jobs, will prove the latest technology sensation for the company.

Since its resurgence a decade ago after the launch of the iMac range of computers, Apple has gone from strength to strength after its success with the iPod and the iTunes music service and its rapid growth in the telecoms market with the launch of the iPhone.

The only blot on the landscape for Apple is an increasingly acrimonious legal spat with Nokia, the world's largest phone maker, after the Finnish company upped the ante this week by complaining to the US International Trade Commission that Apple's iPhone violates virtually all of its intellectual property rights.

For a List of Local Solicitors please follow this link:
Contract Solicitors in the UK

Article Reference: business.timesonline .co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/technology/article6972473.ece

Photo: warwick .ac.uk/fac/sci/whri/conferences/ipod-touch.jpg