Docklands Solicitor

An Employer dare not just agree a compensation package with a leaving Employee.

The Employee may pocket the money and still sue the Employer for any or more of the many possible employment claims - unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal, unfair selection for redundancy, discrimination on the grounds of race, sex, and religion age and so on.

The only thing an Employer can do to prevent this is by requiring the Employee to sign a properly drawn up compromise agreement in front of a solicitor.

The Employer normally foots the bill of the solicitor, so there is often no additional cost to the Employee.

We draw up such Compromise Agreements and in other circumstances, we act as the solicitor advising the Employee on one.

Amongst many other things, the Employee wants to know whether the compensation package might be bettered, what the tax implications are and the limits of any restrictions imposed.

Our senior partner Michael Breeze is available for consultation at our London E14 5DY Docklands consulting rooms at One Canada Square. Ring 020 7712 1751 or Michael direct on
07 900 195 195 to make an appointment.

Labels: compromise agreement employment unfair dismissal

If a company receiver sues and loses, the defendant cannot get a costs order against the receiver personally. The receiver is not liable. He is an agent of the company. Since it is the company suing, it is the company that is liable for costs (although it will almost certainly have no money).

Whilst a non-party costs order could be made against a receiver, that would only be in an “exceptional” case.

The defendant should apply for a security of costs.

Labels: receiver costs liability

When you enter into a contract to supply goods or services do you make sure you know exactly who you are dealing with and who is responsible for payment of your invoice?

We often find in debt collecting matters that our client has not made proper enquiry as to the true identity of their customer. It may be a limited company, a partnership or an individual trading in his or her own name, or under a trading name. It is not necessarily the person who places the order who is responsible.

If it becomes necessary to issue proceedings to recover a bad debt this failure can cost time and money and may even lead to proceedings being issued against the wrong party and a costs order against you.

Labels: debts payments

Since 1st October 2006, Landlords have had to carry out a fire safety risk assessment on properties with common areas e.g. flats, maisonettes, and houses in multiple occupation (HMO).

Not only is it a criminal offence for a landlord not to do this assessment, it may invalidate the buildings insurance.

Labels: fire safety risk assessment

The National Minimum Wage increased on 1st October 2008

The minimum wage is a legal right which covers almost all workers above compulsory school leaving age. There are different minimum wage rates for different groups of workers as follows:

· The main Adult rate (for workers aged 22 and over) is currently set at £5.73 an hour.

· The development rate for 18-21 year olds is currently set at £4.77 an hour.

The development rate for 16-17 years olds is £3.53 an hour.

Labels: minimum wage

M(ale) and F(emale) bought a home in joint names. M paid the deposit, the joint mortgage and the bills. No declaration of trust was completed.

When their 23+ year relationship came to an end, M argued that the property had only been put in joint names as he wanted it to pass to F on his death.

The Court of Appeal held that in the absence of an express agreement, one must presume joint equitable ownership and therefore it was for M to rebut that presumption

He did not succeed because:

M never told F that M only wanted F to own the house if he predeceased her. There was therefore no shared intention

Contribution to other household expenses permitted an inference that the parties treated their incomes and assets ‘as one pool from which household expenses will be paid’

Labels: cohabitees joint ownership

Many people think that if you are married, you do not need to leave a will, as everything goes to the spouse. They are wrong!

The spouse gets a set amount ( the statutory legacy - see below) , personal belongings, and only the income for life from half the rest

As from 1 February 2009:

Where the intestate leaves a spouse and children, the spouses legacy will be £250,000 - up from £125,000

Where there are no children, but the intestate is survived by parents or siblings, the spouses legacy will be £450,000 - up from £250,000

The position if you are not married is even worse!!!

Labels: Administration estates Intestacy statutory legacy increase

An Employer dare not just agree a compensation package with a leaving Employee. The Employee may pocket the money and still sue the Employer for any or more of the many possible employment claims – unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal, unfair selection for redundancy, discrimination on the grounds of race, sex, and religion age and so on.

The only thing an Employer can do to prevent this is by requiring the Employee to sign a properly drawn up compromise agreement in front of a solicitor. The Employer normally foots the bill of the solicitor, so there is no cost to the Employee

We draw up such Compromise Agreements and in other circumstances, we act as the solicitor advising the Employee on one. Amongst many other things, the Employee wants to know whether the compensation package could be bettered, what the tax implications are and the limits of any restrictions imposed

Call Michael Breeze 07 900 915 195 www.docklandssolicitor.co.uk

Labels: compromise agreement employment dismissal

You are a tenant about to leave business premises and have just received a scary schedule of dilapidations from your landlord, itemising numerous alleged items of disrepair. You turn to the end and see the thousands of pounds that the landlord is seeking from you. Do not panic!

It may be just that the landlord’s surveyor went round the property and listed out everything that he thought should be done without regard to the terms of the lease.

Come to us and we will look through those terms and work out whether the item allegedly in disrepair is, in fact, an item which was leased to you under the lease. You may not have any responsibility for it at all.

Next, we look at the standard of repair to which you signed up. It may be that the surveyor is asking you to go beyond “mere repairing” and seeking to get back for the landlord something that he never had in the first place (“betterment”)

The context in which the lease was granted is often important, especially if the lease has been a long one. The area may have improved since the date of grant of the lease and this may work in your favour (and, unfortunately, for you, vice versa, if the neighbourhood has gone down market).

The landlord may not be able to force you to remedy inherent defects or design faults. There was one case where a basement flooded regularly and everyone agreed that something should be done about this. However, amazingly, everyone also agreed that no damage had been done to the fabric of the building, it was, therefore, not in disrepair and the court held that if there was no disrepair, the tenant could not be made to sort out the bad design or workmanship which allowed the flooding to happen.

All is not lost. Ring us now!

Michael Breeze Mobile: 07 900 195.195 email: mdb@kaslers.co.uk

Labels: landlord tenant lease dilapidations repair

There is now a statutory duty on directors to avoid conflicts of interest, to declare interests in transactions and arrangement with the company; and not to accept benefits from third parties.

Labels: company director conflicts