- This topic has 22 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 20 years, 9 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
OK, how can we help Pat out ?
Unfortunately he isn’t a subscriber otherwise I’d suggest a £200 payout from that account to help him out of the situation towards his legal fees, subscribers in agreement of course.
Or, do we anyway as a PR excercise to gain more subscribers, he can always pay it back when he wins 😉
Dave.
Re: Pat-UK
I think that the offer of support is probably more importnt than the actual cash as it were and shows that the subs do have back up if you like.
Whilst I appreciate that Pat does not subscribe at the moment the gesture may be enough to tip the subs thing back into the limelight again, especially if we in TWR, post accordingly to drive the conversation on it. Pat is also a long-standing member and not just a new sign up, so we do have some history there.
It also does a bit more if you think it through. It shows that we will back up members in trouble which, in a way, says to many a WP etc. that we don’t want to be fucked about nor do we want to see members fucked about and that we are prepared to back that up. Given that they have no idea how much cash is in the pot at any given time or the reserves available for such a deed they may well think twice about doing anything “nasty”.
At first glance the above may seem a little callous in some ways, in using Pat’s unfortunate situation to our own ends but I don’t see it that way at all. I see that we can help him and ourselves in the longer term at the same time and, to me, that makes sense.
K.
Re: Pat-UK
Pat may not be a Subscriber, but he is a Member and therefore part of the family. I’d offer him the support, especially as he doesn’t seem to have done anything about getting a solicitor, if I follow the thread correctly.
Chris.
Re: Pat-UK
I see this as an oppurtunity to show the whole trade that UKW is a real community and willing to support it’s own. The message sent out to the trade would be a watershed in that there is at last an organisation willing to help it’s members in their time of need.
I agree with Ken that money is not the important thing but we should offer it anyway along with our continued support for this member. Perhaps it could be done by the AC to show that it is to be viewed as a double edged sword. In so much that it would be seen to not only dicipline members if neccessary but also support members against the more stupid and unrealistic expectations from some of our customer base.
It might also serve to show some work providers that they are now dealing with a community instead of a collection of individuals.
Just a thought
Sean
Re: Pat-UK
I think that Pat UK has been a little unwise in answering this customer to the degree he has. Whilst I fully agree he seems to be in the right as far as the complaint goes, I think he should have taken professional advice long before this.
Our advice should be just that, its not to late. Other advice should be along the lines of FSB who offer free advice in certain circumstances. The subscribers idea was to help in just this situation, but it surely was meant to be help to “subscribers”.
So whilst it does not seem much I think Pat-UK should be advised to seek legal help, again trying to stay unbiased to his personnel problems.Kevin
There’s the conundrum though Kevin with all the claims from the public, the cost of legal advice will (more often than not) outweigh the amount claimed. Therefore, it’s more financially efficient just to pay them off.
My attitude to such things is, fuck that, I will not pay out unless I’m in the wrong otherwise I’ll fight it tooth and bloody nail!
Case in point, Bradshaws from whom I’ve had another letter reassigning it to Bristol court.
K.
Re: Pat-UK
Del wrote:I see this as an oppurtunity to show the whole trade that UKW is a real community and willing to support it’s own.
I agree with you on this Sean as I believe everyone else here agrees, also the idea Dave originally mentioned about helping him out on this one financially. OK so he doesn’t subscribe (Yet, he friggin’ will do when I’ve done with him 😆 ) but I reckon if he looses his case we should at least offer to pitch in his losses. A few hundred quid guys?, that’s all, besides UKW will get it back from his future subs anyway…..!
“UKW is a real community”……….lets prove this again this way for all the trade to see the benefit of UKW membership! 😀
The customer is always right ….Bollocks!…not in this case 👿
Re: Pat-UK
No where do I read that Pat-UK is asking for monetary help, just support. I think to offer subscriber funds to a non subscriber is shakey ground to go on, why not wait and see what the outcome is. The real danger is in setting a precedent of using subscriber funds for non subscribers, where do you stop?
The idea behind the subscription was to use the money to the benefit of members.
As so few have made comment here bearing in mind the number of subscribers you could always put it to a vote (poll)
KevinRe: Pat-UK
I see Kev’s point on setting a precedent and it is a valid concern IMO.
I do think that the point should be made that the subs fund is there for this kinda crap though.
However this all goes back to the original reason for the fund to be there in the first place and its current purpose in life.
I still think that we should look into having a legal bod on hand to deal with shit like this for the subs and, if it costs an extra few quid a year then so what? It’s money well spent if you don’t ever need it in insurance and money extremely well spent if you ever do. By that I mean the crap I’ve gotten from the likes of Bradshaws would likely never have happened if they knew that we had proper representation that dealt with such things.
I just don’t know where to start with it, nor have I really the time to do it right now. 😕
K.
Re: Pat-UK
kwatt wrote:I do think that the point should be made that the subs fund is there for this kinda crap though.
As Kevin pointed out that at no stage has Pat asked for financial help. And this bit about creating precendents and/or whether or not Pat is a subscriber is not my point. But I did give a clue to exactly where I was coming from with the ‘Masonic’ reference 😉
Ask yourselves ‘why the hell did Pat-UK tell us his problem’???? Not that he wanted financial help or sympathy, or even to warn others of his predicament…..He wanted help and advice from us all. He is worried shitless over this, his self-esteem has been violated and no doubt he has had many sleepless nights.
Many of us here have offered direct advice and encouragement to him, and there is clearly little else we can do. By the way, because the claimant is demanding little in compensation, a solicitor cannot be commissioned and my researching the Public Liability route as far as legal help in a case like this, they don’t want to know…its a lost cause of minor significance and no reward in their eyes and rightly so!
But what we can do collectively above and beyond the call, is to ‘offer’ him his costs should he lose. That’s the Masonic way of dealing with things and possibly alien to the former DASA approach (oops! should’nt mention them here Martin 😳 ) that is the backbone of many members thoughts and principles.
Band of Brothers???.. this may be a tester????
I agree Martin and I get the point of what you’re saying/asking here.
I think we should back up those in trouble, hell I offered that to someone not so many months ago and the offer was reciprocated some time later. In the end, we have to rely on each other for support, be that financial or otherwise and I see no harm in offering such support here in this instance.
We have to start somwhere…
K.
Re: Pat-UK
If we accept Martin’s points, which I can largely agree with, that Pat’s problem is the process rather than a financial penalty ensuing, may I suggest that we offer to pay for him to consult a solicitor and find out how he should be playing this? None of us are sufficiently skilled to really know how he should play this, although we seem to be agreed that his customer/plaintiff is a prat. That isn’t the law though.
I don’t know what we should ask in return? A bit of quiet satisfaction is nice, but we have an opportunity to demonstrate “bared teeth” by UKW in defence of its own. This is a trivial matter in the great scheme of things, but were it publically noted that UKW had acted, a number of parties would have to take notice for the future.
We have discussed the AC at length and so far it has not been seen to do anything at all, bar nominally exist, so this might be a useful first outing. Doing it this way would deflect any responsibility away from Admin, or personalities, in fact the AC would be seen to be acting for the Membership in a positive way, instead of the veiled threat of the “big stick if you cock up” which will be one way that the council is perceived.
I know that we don’t have an AC Forum, but a statement from the AC that we have assisted Pat’s business (No name=no shame) would open a new door for us.
I know that Kevin is technically absolutely correct, but we don’t deal in absolutes, here we’re dealing with people. I think that Martin should sign Pat up to the Subscribers ASAP. I think that we should instruct Pat to see a solicitor ASAP. I further think that we should offer him £100 towards that consultation, with no strings beyond what I have suggested above.
It’s worth it.
Failing that, I’ll have to activate the southern cell of the Penguinista early and deal with the matter. It would be a bit of a shame, as we were looking at disrupting the first Saturfday of Wimbledon.
Chris.
Re: Pat-UK
They serve penquin at Wimballsdon…..!!!!
how much is a slice????
:):):):)My other point is that we here in the WR should not be deciding to hand out subscriber cash.
Also please consult with accounts@ukwhitegoods.co.uk before signing any one up to the subscribers, so we can admin it correctly.Ta
Kevin
You will have an AC Forum today.
That awfully clever Trevor put a hack in place last night to patch the admin module. Some people are just too damned smart! 😀
For now I’ll give admin permission to view along with the AC members and leave it at that. The topic headings will appear in the scroll box so be careful what you say please in that bit.
K.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.