driving a defective vehicle
Discussion
i jumped into the mobile skip that my company calls a van a few months ago,i dont normally drive that van but i noticed straight away such things like both mirrors were smashed,starter shagged and a wheel bearing was noisy.
i replaced both mirors that day and reported the noisy bearing.
went out in same van again today and the bearing noise has got really bad.
on my return i mentioned the noise was bad,they said they knew but there were no plans to get it fixed.
ive been a mechanic for 30 odd years and know when something is getting dangerous,and this is getting that way,i said that in my opinion said vehicle was dangerous and i refused to drive it till it was fixed,glazed look all around and back to their paperwork.
thing is ,i am due to take the van out on monday,they wont repair anything till it wont go another yard,where do i stand legally in refusing to take defective vehicle out?
i replaced both mirors that day and reported the noisy bearing.
went out in same van again today and the bearing noise has got really bad.
on my return i mentioned the noise was bad,they said they knew but there were no plans to get it fixed.
ive been a mechanic for 30 odd years and know when something is getting dangerous,and this is getting that way,i said that in my opinion said vehicle was dangerous and i refused to drive it till it was fixed,glazed look all around and back to their paperwork.
thing is ,i am due to take the van out on monday,they wont repair anything till it wont go another yard,where do i stand legally in refusing to take defective vehicle out?
You are entitled to a safe vehicle. Put your complaint in writing to them asap.
If they dismiss you, it is an automatically unfair dismissal, s.100 ERA 1996, see below. You don't even need to be there for the requisite minimum 12 months, Health & Safety protection applies from day 1. Good luck and keep me informed...
Extract from Employment Rights Act 1996:
100. - (1) An employee who is dismissed shall be regarded for the purposes of this Part as unfairly dismissed if the reason (or, if more than one, the principal reason) for the dismissal is that-
(a) having been designated by the employer to carry out activities in connection with preventing or reducing risks to health and safety at work, the employee carried out (or proposed to carry out) any such activities,
(b) being a representative of workers on matters of health and safety at work or member of a safety committee-
(i) in accordance with arrangements established under or by virtue of any enactment, or
(ii) by reason of being acknowledged as such by the employer,
the employee performed (or proposed to perform) any functions as such a representative or a member of such a committee,
(c) being an employee at a place where-
(i) there was no such representative or safety committee, or
(ii) there was such a representative or safety committee but it was not reasonably practicable for the employee to raise the matter by those means,
he brought to his employer's attention, by reasonable means, circumstances connected with his work which he reasonably believed were harmful or potentially harmful to health or safety,
(d) in circumstances of danger which the employee reasonably believed to be serious and imminent and which he could not reasonably have been expected to avert, he left (or proposed to leave) or (while the danger persisted) refused to return to his place of work or any dangerous part of his place of work, or
(e) in circumstances of danger which the employee reasonably believed to be serious and imminent, he took (or proposed to take) appropriate steps to protect himself or other persons from the danger.
(2) For the purposes of subsection (1)(e) whether steps which an employee took (or proposed to take) were appropriate is to be judged by reference to all the circumstances including, in particular, his knowledge and the facilities and advice available to him at the time.
(3) Where the reason (or, if more than one, the principal reason) for the dismissal of an employee is that specified in subsection (1)(e), he shall not be regarded as unfairly dismissed if the employer shows that it was (or would have been) so negligent for the employee to take the steps which he took (or proposed to take) that a reasonable employer might have dismissed him for taking (or proposing to take) them.
If they dismiss you, it is an automatically unfair dismissal, s.100 ERA 1996, see below. You don't even need to be there for the requisite minimum 12 months, Health & Safety protection applies from day 1. Good luck and keep me informed...
Extract from Employment Rights Act 1996:
100. - (1) An employee who is dismissed shall be regarded for the purposes of this Part as unfairly dismissed if the reason (or, if more than one, the principal reason) for the dismissal is that-
(a) having been designated by the employer to carry out activities in connection with preventing or reducing risks to health and safety at work, the employee carried out (or proposed to carry out) any such activities,
(b) being a representative of workers on matters of health and safety at work or member of a safety committee-
(i) in accordance with arrangements established under or by virtue of any enactment, or
(ii) by reason of being acknowledged as such by the employer,
the employee performed (or proposed to perform) any functions as such a representative or a member of such a committee,
(c) being an employee at a place where-
(i) there was no such representative or safety committee, or
(ii) there was such a representative or safety committee but it was not reasonably practicable for the employee to raise the matter by those means,
he brought to his employer's attention, by reasonable means, circumstances connected with his work which he reasonably believed were harmful or potentially harmful to health or safety,
(d) in circumstances of danger which the employee reasonably believed to be serious and imminent and which he could not reasonably have been expected to avert, he left (or proposed to leave) or (while the danger persisted) refused to return to his place of work or any dangerous part of his place of work, or
(e) in circumstances of danger which the employee reasonably believed to be serious and imminent, he took (or proposed to take) appropriate steps to protect himself or other persons from the danger.
(2) For the purposes of subsection (1)(e) whether steps which an employee took (or proposed to take) were appropriate is to be judged by reference to all the circumstances including, in particular, his knowledge and the facilities and advice available to him at the time.
(3) Where the reason (or, if more than one, the principal reason) for the dismissal of an employee is that specified in subsection (1)(e), he shall not be regarded as unfairly dismissed if the employer shows that it was (or would have been) so negligent for the employee to take the steps which he took (or proposed to take) that a reasonable employer might have dismissed him for taking (or proposing to take) them.
Many moons ago I was given a shocker of a 405 for a company car. I tried telling the employer that is was knackered and they poo poo'd it
So I took it to the local dealers on Saturday morning and they kindly gave it the once over and gave the the list.
On the monday (I walked into the office and gave the boss the list) and explained that the car was unfit to drive and I'd left it at the main dealers.
Strangely the car was scrapped - the repair bill was about £1700 and there was NO way the car was worth that - I didn't proove to popular!!
So I took it to the local dealers on Saturday morning and they kindly gave it the once over and gave the the list.
On the monday (I walked into the office and gave the boss the list) and explained that the car was unfit to drive and I'd left it at the main dealers.
Strangely the car was scrapped - the repair bill was about £1700 and there was NO way the car was worth that - I didn't proove to popular!!
not so much a request,more a me no drive it if it isnt fixed,take it or leave it ,see ya in the morning...i have a way with words!
its typical of the"vans/plant dont need servicing till they wont go any more" attitude and when they go pop running around like headless chickens looking for a replacement.
its typical of the"vans/plant dont need servicing till they wont go any more" attitude and when they go pop running around like headless chickens looking for a replacement.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff