responsible for leased vehicle

thebullsback

whos moaning tomtom?? I asked for any thoughts and have not moaned once.
Sangie acts are NOT law please look before you leap.

sangie595

thebullsback wrote: »

whos moaning tomtom?? I asked for any thoughts and have not moaned once.
Sangie acts are NOT law please look before you leap.

I am struggling to find where I said that acts are law. However, since Acts ARE law then perhaps you really ought to follow Tontontom's advice and try to find out the facts of what you are moaning about. And of course you are moaning about it. You came here blandly asking for opinions - you got opinions and all you have done since you got those opinions is moan about them not being the opinions that you wanted. The employer has determined new policy. The recognised trades union has agreed that policy. If you don't like your employers policy there is a feasible way of not having to adhere to it. Get another job.

tomtontom

thebullsback wrote: »

whos moaning tomtom?? I asked for any thoughts and have not moaned once.
Sangie acts are NOT law please look before you leap.

What do you think an Act is, if not law?

thebullsback

Act can only have the force of law when agreed to. This is a maxim of law. Which basically means it isn't law unless there is agreement of the parties. (Contract). A drivers licence, Hunting Licence, etc would be proof of contract. Basically what it boils down to is this.

1,. Criminal Code - Deals with Crime. Murder, Theft, Assault, Property Damage etc.
2. Acts - Contract Terms.
3. Bylaws - Corporate Policies, which are only applicable to corporate employees.

Many people lump all the above under "law" which is not the case. There are major differences which is why they have different classifications

sangie595

thebullsback wrote: »

Act can only have the force of law when agreed to. This is a maxim of law. Which basically means it isn't law unless there is agreement of the parties. (Contract). A drivers licence, Hunting Licence, etc would be proof of contract. Basically what it boils down to is this.

1,. Criminal Code - Deals with Crime. Murder, Theft, Assault, Property Damage etc.
2. Acts - Contract Terms.
3. Bylaws - Corporate Policies, which are only applicable to corporate employees.

Many people lump all the above under "law" which is not the case. There are major differences which is why they have different classifications

What complete rubbish. I do not have to agree to a law in order for it to apply to me. By your reasoning it would be perfectly ok for me to go out and murder someone because at no point in time have I ever agreed to the statute relating to murder. I am bound by the Road Traffic Act whether or not I have a driving license. It is the law. And byelaws - good grief, you think they are employment policies? Really???

Come on now. You are trolling aren't you? I'm out.

thebullsback

2. Acts - Contract Terms.

tomtontom

sangie595 wrote: »

What complete rubbish. I do not have to agree to a law in order for it to apply to me. By your reasoning it would be perfectly ok for me to go out and murder someone because at no point in time have I ever agreed to the statute relating to murder. I am bound by the Road Traffic Act whether or not I have a driving license. It is the law. And byelaws - good grief, you think they are employment policies? Really???

Come on now. You are trolling aren't you? I'm out.

One can only hope he is. No one could be that (insert as appropriate) could they?

sangie595

tomtontom wrote: »

No one could be that (insert as appropriate) could they?

Regrettably, given recent election results, I'd have to say yes, they can. It's deeply worrying that the UK literacy rate doesn't measure anything but reading ability. We'd be in deep trouble if they had to actually understand what they read.

bap98189

thebullsback wrote: »

My employer with Trade union blessing has agreed that should the driver of any of the numerous lease vehicle provided cause damage to or be involved in any accident that brakes any Road traffic act the driver will bepersonally responsible for any costs.
Any thoughts ???

Liable to what extent?

For the excess on the insurance (how much is it?)
For any damage to the car (could easily be £20k+)
For damage to other vehicles? (Can you afford £100k+)

I would require a lot more information before making a decision. If it's a £200 excess then maybe I'd be OK with that, but anything more and I doubt I would be continuing to drive company vehicles. Unfortunately accidents happen, often due to a minor lapse of concentration, there is no way in hell I would be working in a job where such an event could cost me personally a large amount of money.

oneblondebrow

I work for a well known hire car company so drive many different cars and also meet many people who have leased company cars.

My company says I am responsible for my second at fault accident/damage caused to a company vehicle and have to pay the £250 excess (They give us 1 free accident), we also have to attend a meeting to discuss what happened and what we can do in the future to avoid it happening again. Me as an employee is also liable for speeding fines and the relevant points although if the company chooses not to say who was driving or can't work out who were driving then the company gets a thousand pound fine, I am also liable for parking fine whilst in a company car which I had to pay £55 for last month as I was not aware the local council where I was did not allow 2 wheels on pavement parking when my local council does, I just paid it as assumed that's my problem for not knowing.

As for the people I meet with company leased cars they pretty much have the exact same rules as me but with varying excess to pay.