Pffff…
I wonder how they stand legally here? I guess if you sign your contract of employment stating you accept this, then they have got you.
kiwitaff:
JLS Driver SOS:
That’s just a stupid cover for the claim excess , their insurance company obviously do not pay the first 10% of any claim, so the company want you to cover it, whatI do not understand is, in claims nobody admits liability anyway, so really you would never have to pay.But if i was to drive in to a building site and into a puddle that was deep and rip the tank off they are £800 therefore i am £80 down on my wage. ( this was an example the tm told me had happened).
Havnt took the job yet i told him i would ring today, By the looks of it i wont be taking it thanks for all your input.
Make sure you tell him why you’ve declined his generous offer or this sort of attitude persists!
Roymondo:
Yup - maybe I need to learn to read! (Or at least, consider having these specs re-glazed)
I graciously accept your apology Raymondo. 
Roymondo:
owen1955:
i had a car undertake me on the Linwood roundabout peo driver was a manager for the Big transport company in the Glasgow area my outfit hire a yard and acess thro there yard my boss asked £1000 for the damage i told him to go and whistle so he gave me 6months writen warning instead i know other drivers that pay for their damageAny chance of reposting that in English?
You obviously have a problem reading, why do you take it upon yourself to have a go at people that make a few mistakes.
Dafman:
You obviously have a problem reading, why do you take it upon yourself to have a go at people that make a few mistakes.
Why does your only contribution to this particular discussion have to be a “go at” me? Do you have nothing else with which to occupy your time?
We get £10 a day bonus for damage and paperwork, I had a bump in park royal, caught a 51plate saab’s (think it was a donor car) bumper, wing and smashed the o/s headlight with the t bar on the trailer, it probably made it a wright off, cost me 1 days bonus. I was ■■■■■■ off with myself and accepted that I had f’d up, which my boss seemed happy about as apparently many don’t care.
If I have another one in the next year I get a warning, 2 a written, 3 a final and 4 it’s goodbye.
Seem’s fair enough to me.
I’ve talked with more than a few drivers who have either experienced this directly or work with someone who has.
There’s a local Co’ who run HIAB’s, tippers, grabs, roadsweepers & low loaders. They are constantly advertising in the free media themselves & utilising agencies. They’ll set you on at what you’re experienced at, but within a couple of weeks you are told you’re required on another type of truck.
Of course, they’ll willingly invest in you & train you up, inc’ LGVC to C+E.
Within a few weeks of that happening, you will be dragged into the office to explain your recent ‘at fault’ accident. Either stone off the top of the tipper, tail swing swiping a parked car etc. Usually a high value Merc or BMW. It will be aggressively pointed out that you signed an employment contract that included your 20% contribution to non fault accidents + you will need to refund any training costs if you leave before 24mths.
The Co’ is owned by thugs & hoodlums, although they are not listed as Directors (they’re barred) & employs drivers who’ve worked there for years with no problem.
I reckon they’re selecting a few gullible folk to purposely con. Getting at least 1 months free labour out of them.
I’ve spoken to more than 5 drivers who’ve had this happen to them by this Co’, 1 of them was explaining to me why he’d left but seemed to be totally oblivious to the scam. Another had managed to rustle up some muscle to visit the offices to get his wages paid.
If you’re prepared to sign employment contracts that bind you to risking your money for your employers business, you’d better pray it’s not a Co’ like this one.
Lusk:
Pffff…I wonder how they stand legally here? I guess if you sign your contract of employment stating you accept this, then they have got you.
I’ve queried this before and AIUI it’s under ‘unfair’ contract law; a 30% lump sum deduction off £800 (example above) would be dubious wouldn’t it?
Roymreallyodon’tuote="Dafman:
You obviously have a problem reading, why do you take it upon yourself to yoursel go at people that make a few mistakes.
Why does your only contribution to this particular discussion have to be a “go at” me? Do you have nothing else with which to occupy your time?
[/quote]
Well you obviously do because once again you have to have a go at someone for grammar, I don’t know why you seem to think you are so fantastic at grammar that you can judge other people. Obviously your not if you look at a previous post.
And there is nothing to say that everyone else hasn’t said. But if the op needs a job take it, then he can look for another while he is there.
Dafman:
I don’t know why you seem to think you are so fantastic at grammar that you can judge other people. Obviously your not if you look at a previous post.
Go on then - which post would that be? Put up or shut up.
Roymondo:
Dafman:
I don’t know why you seem to think you are so fantastic at grammar that you can judge other people. Obviously your not if you look at a previous post.Go on then - which post would that be? Put up or shut up.
It’s on this thread go and find it but answer the question, why do you think you are above everyone else, what gives you the right to constantly pick at peoples grammar on here
The same principle that gives you the right to pick at what I post. But, just like the last time (which I chose not to challenge) you accuse me of “pot calling kettle black syndrome” while not actually saying where or when these grammatical faux-pas of mine have been made. I wonder why that might be.
Roymondo:
The same principle that gives you the right to pick at what I post. But, just like the last time (which I chose not to challenge) you accuse me of “pot calling kettle black syndrome” while not actually saying where or when these grammatical faux-pas of mine have been made. I wonder why that might be.
Once again as in the past you won’t answer the question, what gives you the right to pick on people’s grammar, and once you do that you are wide open to criticism, some people use there phones and don’t notice what is being typed, some struggle, and you just seem to pick on them. Why?
Calm down ladies and take this else where will you 
some people just are very clumsy , and they never change . i knew a guy nicknamed JINXIE , he snapped a handbrake clean off the floor of a vw van only 1 week old .
corij:
some people just are very clumsy , and they never change . i knew a guy nicknamed JINXIE , he snapped a handbrake clean off the floor of a vw van only 1 week old .
Wouldn’t have liked to have had an arm wrestle with him.
Edited for bad grammar
:
Calm down ladies and take this else where will you
Neil it’s the fact that this is a Lorry/Truck driver’s forum not an English lesson, some people can spell some struggle, there is no need to have a go at people for it, it tantamounts to bullying. And it’s not the first time posters on here have corrected people but they never explain why they do it.
Sorry double post.
mrpj:
Lusk:
Pffff…I wonder how they stand legally here? I guess if you sign your contract of employment stating you accept this, then they have got you.
I’ve queried this before and AIUI it’s under ‘unfair’ contract law; a 30% lump sum deduction off £800 (example above) would be dubious wouldn’t it?
I, too, think that this comes within the scope of the “Unfair Terms of Contract” law. If it does, it means that the WHOLE contract, not just this clause, is deemed to be unfair and unenforceable.
Dafman:
:
Calm down ladies and take this else where will youNeil it’s the fact that this is a Lorry/Truck driver’s forum not an English lesson, some people can spell some struggle, there is no need to have a go at people for it, it tantamounts to bullying. And it’s not the first time posters on here have corrected people but they never explain why they do it.
That’s pretty much the point - this is a Forum where the only communication is written English (embellished by the odd Smiley etc). Doesn’t matter whether it’s truck drivers, brain surgeons, coal miners or Vicars & Tarts. The issue (for me) is not spelling - who really cares in all honesty, as long as the meaning is clear? Rather it is the simple courtesy of ordinary communication (be it verbal or textual) where you break up whatever you have to say into manageable chunks so that (a) your meaning is clear and (b) your audience have an opportunity to understand it.
As an example - If you were involved in a conversation in your local pub, social club or (heaven forbid) supermarket RDC, and someone chipped in, blurting out a whole load of stuff without pausing for breath and giving you the chance to take in each of the points they were making, you’d likely say “Hang on - run that by me again” or similar. Of course, in an online environment, you have the opportunity to re-read what they have typed in order to try to work out what they are saying. But my point is - So Do They! Anyone posting here has the opportunity to pause for a second and check that what they have written (a) makes sense and (b) says what they want it to say before they post it. It doesn’t matter whether they are using a PC, smartphone or ZX-81.
And I’m still not sure what happened in owen1955’s example - Someone undertook him on a roundabout and someone wanted him to pay £1000 for some damage, or something like that. Quite what is alleged to have happened is not clear.