If you were an NCT inspector, what would you do?

Seagull said:
I'm guessing the driver was on the appeals board and ruled in the employee's favour.
Click to expand...

I don't understand what you mean? The Employment Appeals Tribunal members would absent themselves from any case where they knew the parties involved.

Brendan
 
Brendan said:
I don't understand what you mean? The Employment Appeals Tribunal members would absent themselves from any case where they knew the parties involved.

Brendan
Click to expand...

So what's the answer (or is this just hypothetical)?

I like efm's answers BTW
 
Maybe it failed because of something like a faulty hand brake, and the one time it didn't work the car rolled down a hill and rolled over the Inspector.
 
Did he have 12 months service ?

Did I follow all company procedures including giving him a fair hearing ?
 
It's a real live case which came before the Appeals Tribunal.

They reinstated him. Only around 2% of cases are actually reinstated.

Read the full decision in this PDF:

[broken link removed]
 
Well the days of baling twine are still with us! The fact that if C had not passed the car and she could still have been able to use the car says it all really. I would have understood him having sympathy for her it if the car would have been impounded. The whole point of the NCT is to make car more roadworthy. C's job is very clear, certain items are an automatic fail and he did not do his job, what if he does it again for someone else and that person has an accident because the car is not roadworthy.

About a week ago a relation of mine had a car NCT test recently and the garage mechanic to which it was brought to beforehand brought the car to the NCT for said relation. It passed.
 
Brendan said:
It's a real live case which came before the Appeals Tribunal.

They reinstated him. Only around 2% of cases are actually reinstated.

Read the full decision in this PDF:

[broken link removed]
Click to expand...


Who writes this? It was making sense to me until references to 'H' start at the top of page 3 ('T spoke to H who requested a meeting.').

H is referred to a number of times subsequently, BEFORE he is partially identified at the bottom of page 3 ('H was her mechanic') however there is no '(hereafter referred to as H)'.

As such I rule this Determination to be invalid and withdraw the right of appeal.
 
:)Well spotted.

I have seen a few semi-legal documents like these re investigations/appeals etc and they are often shockingly badly presented/worded and sometimes ambiguous and self contradictory - extremely careless and unprofessional given the nature of the documents.
 
Brendan said:
I think that the guy who wrote this report should be fired immediately.

Brendan
Click to expand...
Firing him would allow him to look for another job, and possibly commit further crimes against language. I would recommend shooting him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top