TBH they seem like reasonable grounds for disciplinary action. Presumably she was in uniform at the time. and it wasn't an official rest break. I'm not legally qualified either but I think it is reasonable for the management to use bodycam evidence in relation to misnduct allegations when on duty. Is there a rule in your contract/employee handbook that says you mustn't smoke on duty, or while in uniform in public, or something like that? To be more accurate, they didn't use bodycam evidence to discipline her for smoking while on duty because she had turned her bodycam off while smoking! She presumably admitted she had been smoking while on duty when asked why the bodycam had been turned off. In which case that was the evidence used to discipline her, her own admission of smoking, not bodycam evidence.

As you describe it body cams are just a form of PPE and in general an employer can insist PPE is in use throughout an employee's shift. That requirement needs to be clearly stated somewhere though, so that you know you must not turn off your body cam. Are you in a union? If so ask them for advice.

It's best to check these things. Not everyone asking for advice has the familiarity with the legal construction of Wills that some regular posters have. And it's useful for other people reading the thread in the future to be aware of the issue.

Does the Will say anything about what happens if your husband or his sisters die before their mother? There are default rules about what happens in that situation but the default rules can be overridden in the Will. The Will can direct that something different to the default rules happens.

Are you in a union? They may be able to advise you. We aren't really set up here as financial investment advisers but someone may be able to share their experience. So your union may be your best bet. Or they may be able to direct you to a reasonably priced IFA.

Does your contract or employee handbook say anything about how redundancy pay will be calculated? If it says nothing then then I think you would only get statutory redundancy pay. Hopefully @Emmzzi can confirm this but I believe that your weekly pay for statutory redundancy purposes is the average you earned each week in the 12 weeks before you get your redundancy notice. So yes your redundancy would be based, wholly or partly, on your short time working pay. However companies can pay redundancy at higher rates if that is in your contract. So important to check what your contract or employee handbook says. There's a government website that let's you calculate what your statutory redundancy pay would be. You can test out various scenarios to see what you would get. /assets/static/govuk-opengraph-image-dade2dad5775023b0568381c4c074b86318194edb36d3d68df721eea7deeac4b.png Calculate your statutory redundancy pay - GOV.UK WWW.GOV.UK Calculate how much statutory redundancy you can get based on age, weekly pay and number of years in the job

This is the police's own information site about the offence. It's hard to see how you could have any defence to the charge. Whether you think it's fair compared to speeding is irrelevant I'm afraid. Just a moment... WWW.POLICE.UK Tagging @Man in the middle who may be able to comment further, but AFAIK this is an "absolute" offence with a statutory £200 fine + 6 points which no amount of 'mitigating circumstances' can reduce.

My understanding is the same as Manxman. If the vehicle is roadworthy, complies with construction and use regulation and is MOTd then it ought not to be an issue requiring disclosure if insurers don't ask about it. Is the Cat information publicly available? If so insurers could have checked it themselves if they thought it relevant.

Tell HR your copy of the updated staff handbook didn't arrive and ask for it to be resent. You need to know what it says to see what the company is entitled to do. Being on an annual salary doesn't automatically mean your pay can't be reduced for short time working.

I'll ask again @cuckooflower Instead of arguing with us about whether you will win in court - a judge will decide that, it won't be decided here - please clarify what advice you would like then we can see if anyone can help.

@cuckooflower I've lost track of what help it is you want from us. If you could clarify what advice you would like we can see if anyone can help. Unless you find a reported disability discrimination decision that is very similar to your own circumstances - ie something involving parking - there's not much point in posting unrelated decisions as they aren't relevant. There are many reported employment tribunal decisions involving disabilty disrimination every month but they tell us nothing about how a court might judge your circumstances.

Whilst this is no help to you with your Chargeback problem just wanted to share that I did a train tour of Uzbekistan just before Covid and it was a fantastic experience. You'll love it. Happy to share any travellers tips.

If you already have a barrister acting for you would be better off asking them these legal questions, rather than ask them here on a forum where no-one is a qualified lawyer.

I'll ask again @cuckooflower. Have you taken professional legal advice that has confirmed the many statments of the law in your posts. Has a litigation lawyer told you that you have a good chance of winning such an an action for discrimination?

My question was @cuckooflower whether you have taken professional legal advcie that has confirmed the many stetments of the law in your post. Have you? Has a litigation lawyer told you that you have a good chance of winning such an an action ?

Have you taken legal advice on whether a Vento band claim for loss of feelings etc can be brought through MCOL? Or are you starting the action in a different court? Have you taken legal advice on whether the PPC continuing with their recovery action amounts to disability discrimination? The issuing of the original PCN presumably wasn't discrimination as the PPC did not know, and could not reasonably have been expected to know, that you had a disability at the time of issuing the PCN. Incidentally, breach of the disability discrimination provisions of the Equality Act 2010 is not a " criminal offence of discrimination". It is not a crime, it is a civil matter.

Which jurisdiction governs a contract can be legally complex and you'd need a lawyer to study all the documents. But as you are unlikely ever to obtain those best to assume that English law applies. That could challenged by the land owner but they would presumably have to produce evidence of how the contract was formed. Unless the contract contains an express jurisdiction clause saying which law applies to it. I doubt an English PPC would be prepared to operate under a contract that was subject to BVI law, but stranger things have happened.

FT is paywalled for me, free version here Why rage is no substitute for political strategy | Financial Times (archive.ph)

I had a quick look online and there are several examples of a TfL ULEZ PCN and and they are all similar to this example https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=i&url=http%3A%2F%2Fforums.National Consumer Service.com%2Flofiversion%2Findex.php%2Ft128654.html&psig=AOvVaw3Qj6YnoERO9G67SUs606u1&ust=1683302327668000&source=images&cd=vfe&ved=0CBIQjhxqFwoTCICirJaE3P4CFQAAAAAdAAAAABAR My French isn't that great but the document you put in your Post #1 looks to me like a more or less direct translation into French of page 1 of a TfL PCN. If, that is, "Attestation de frais" is the French equivalent of "Penalty Charge Notice" in this context. The English PCN states that it is TfL who can take action if the amount is unpaid [Failure to pay ... "may result in the outstanding balance being registered as a debt in the County Court"] and the same phase appears in the French document [..."peut déclarer le solde impayé auprès du Tribunal d'arrondissement (County Court)."]. So my guess is the documents your inlaws have received are the TfL PCNs, not a DCA's 'invoice'.

You don't have to eat it all in one go

Well, I've had a go and it's turned out OK, but nowhere near as neat-looking as one the chef in the Buckingham Palace kitchens makes! How does she get her pastry so perfect.... envy, envy. The King and The Queen Consort's Coronation Quiche - YouTube Tastes good though, the tarragon works well. Popular with all the family so looks like I'll be making it again... Coronation_Quiche.pdf Coronation_Quiche_a.pdf

This is your in law's own vehicle (not a hire car)? So they will be likely to use it drive through the ULEZ again in future? If so, now you know about the requirement to register it makes sense to do so to avoid future hassle, quite apart from helping you with the charges already issued. Register a foreign vehicle - Transport for London TFL.GOV.UK

This article in The Guardian last month explains what's going on here. It seems the invoice may be genuinely from TfL, ie not a fake or a phishing scam, but that doesn't mean you should pay it. Follow dx100's advice. EU motorist fined almost £11,000 after falling foul of London Ulez rule | London | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM French hire car met emissions standard but had not been registered with TfL, resulting in penalty notices Incidentally, you say "The areas described are also out of ULEZ zone" and the invoice just describes it as "A2 Rochester Way Relief Road". But around 1½ miles of the A2 Rochester Way Relief Road is in the ULEZ, from the A207 Shooters Hill roundabout to the the A205 South Circular junction (it's on my patch!).

Doesn't the local council have issue a street closure order for traffic to be stopped? What does it say about resident access? It should be published on council website.

If the owner is trying to sell the business I wouldn't expect him to start any formal process on redundancy until he has agreed a sale. So I'm not sure he's under any obligation to to do anythging yet. @Emmzzi may be able to comment further. It sounds like a small company, just 7 employees (excluding the owner). Is that right? Do you know why the owner is selling? Is the business unprofitable and possibly going to become insolvent? Or is the owner selling a profitable business so that he can retire?