Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Filling Station drive-offs. Who pays?
1,319 views
Skip to first unread message
Bobkoytc
Dec 15, 2013, 5:55:02 PM12/15/13
to
My son has recently started work at a filling station and today had his first experience of a "drive-off".
His concern is that he's been told that the company may deduct the loss from his wages.
Can they do this?
Reading through the Contract of Employment there are circumstances where they can deduct from wages. The nearest circumstance would be if they considered his negligence had caused thew loss.
The drive-off took place on the furthest pump away from the shop which can barely be seen. He was dealing with a queue of customers but saw it happen and got the reg of the vehicle and called the Police. He feels there was nothing he could have done about it.
His concern is that he's been told that the company may deduct the loss from his wages.
Can they do this?
Reading through the Contract of Employment there are circumstances where they can deduct from wages. The nearest circumstance would be if they considered his negligence had caused thew loss.
The drive-off took place on the furthest pump away from the shop which can barely be seen. He was dealing with a queue of customers but saw it happen and got the reg of the vehicle and called the Police. He feels there was nothing he could have done about it.
Janitor of Lunacy
Dec 15, 2013, 8:10:06 PM12/15/13
to
"Bobkoytc" <bobk...@googlemail.com> wrote in message
news:4e1d2c7b-8418-4306...@googlegroups.com...
My son has recently started work at a filling station and today had his
first experience of a "drive-off".
His concern is that he's been told that the company may deduct the loss from
his wages.
Can they do this?
--------
first experience of a "drive-off".
His concern is that he's been told that the company may deduct the loss from
his wages.
Can they do this?
Deductions to cover shortages up to 10% of gross pay are legal if it is so
stated within the contract of employment.
--------
Reading through the Contract of Employment there are circumstances where
they can deduct from wages. The nearest circumstance would be if they
considered his negligence had caused thew loss.
The drive-off took place on the furthest pump away from the shop which can
barely be seen. He was dealing with a queue of customers but saw it happen
and got the reg of the vehicle and called the Police. He feels there was
nothing he could have done about it.
They would have to consider whether this loss was negligent, and there
should be a code of practice setting out the steps to be taken by employees
to minimise losses- if there isn't it's hard to say whether the employee has
departed from them, so it depends on the attitude of the management- if it's
pointed out that the pump is poorly sighted, the employee was alone at the
time, and otherwise occupied, there is obviously scope for doubt as to
whether he met his duty of care to the employer. Making a note of the
registration number and informing the police seems to me to go a long way
towards satisfying his duty of care (if not actually exceeding it) in the
circumstances. The acid test is whether the employer thinks he could have
done more to prevent the drive-off, and short of running out of the shop and
standing in front of the vehicle, at considerable risk to himself, I can't
think of anything more that he could have done.
Saxman
Dec 16, 2013, 3:25:06 AM12/16/13
to
losses, why do they employ CCTV?
polygonum
Dec 16, 2013, 4:05:02 AM12/16/13
to
forgo some of their "wages" (i.e. contract fees) because that did not
stop the drive-off?
Trying to imagine the situation as it would be at the filling stations I
usually use, I can't see how someone could be expected to leave the till
(obviously locking it and performing any other security measures), out
of the shop, and do anything useful to stop a determined thief.
Confrontation could well be dangerous.
Doesn't this realistically work like bank tellers who simply set off an
alarm but might otherwise be fairly co-operative towards bank robbers?
That is, perform the simple measures that the employer has told you to
do but without endangering life and limb.
--
Rod
Roland Perry
Dec 16, 2013, 5:45:05 AM12/16/13
to
In message <l8mdaa$2n5$1...@news.albasani.net>, at 08:25:06 on Mon, 16 Dec
2013, Saxman <john.h.willia...@gmail.com> remarked:
prohibition on having more than one string to their bow.
Nevertheless, in the circumstances described I think the employee
probably did all he could. Leaving his post (at the till) to attempt to
do more would be an even greater problem for all concerned.
The only chink is whether or not the drive-off vehicle in question "has
previous", in which case the employee might have been expected to refuse
to serve them, especially if there's ANPR CCTV and a list of 'hot'
numberplates easy to hand.
--
Roland Perry
2013, Saxman <john.h.willia...@gmail.com> remarked:
>> My son has recently started work at a filling station and today had his first experience of a "drive-off".
>> His concern is that he's been told that the company may deduct the loss from his wages.
>
>> His concern is that he's been told that the company may deduct the loss from his wages.
>
>If employers consider it the responsibility of the employee to make up
>losses, why do they employ CCTV?
To help the employee by reducing drive-offs? In other words there's no
>losses, why do they employ CCTV?
prohibition on having more than one string to their bow.
Nevertheless, in the circumstances described I think the employee
probably did all he could. Leaving his post (at the till) to attempt to
do more would be an even greater problem for all concerned.
The only chink is whether or not the drive-off vehicle in question "has
previous", in which case the employee might have been expected to refuse
to serve them, especially if there's ANPR CCTV and a list of 'hot'
numberplates easy to hand.
--
Roland Perry
Chris R
Dec 16, 2013, 6:55:03 AM12/16/13
to
>
>
> "Roland Perry" wrote in message news:pi0TKIbQ...@perry.co.uk...
shortages from employees without proof of wrongdoing?
--
Chris R
Ste
Dec 16, 2013, 4:50:06 AM12/16/13
to
The only situation I can conceive of is where the garage has some sort of pre-payment protocol in certain circumstances and the employee violates this. For example, a white van turns up in the middle of the night, without numberplates, and the passenger gets out to fill whilst the driver keeps the engine idling. Or the garage has some sort of watch list.
The idea that they'd be expected to run out and stand in front of the car driving off (even if they could do so in time) is just laughable.
It's also not unheard of when a garage is busy, to move your car from the pump to an empty part of the forecourt. Perhaps less common now, I think the last time I did this myself was at least several years ago, and I seem to remember the cashier remarking that she thought I was driving off without paying.
But the only way of distinguishing this from a genuine drive off, is to see if the person actually leaves the forecourt.
Peter Crosland
Dec 16, 2013, 7:50:05 AM12/16/13
to
reluctant to take action but that does not alter the basic unfairness of
such a policy.
--
Peter Crosland
Roland Perry
Dec 16, 2013, 8:10:02 AM12/16/13
to
In message <9fWdnRk8ksBZdDPP...@brightview.co.uk>, at
11:55:03 on Mon, 16 Dec 2013, Chris R <inv...@invalid.munge.co.uk>
remarked:
unusual sales pattern (very high value, and ease of making off without
paying). All they can really do is have cameras (all of them seem to
have for years) and inform the police.
--
Roland Perry
11:55:03 on Mon, 16 Dec 2013, Chris R <inv...@invalid.munge.co.uk>
remarked:
>Isn't the point rather that some retail businesses just deduct till
>shortages from employees without proof of wrongdoing?
That could be a more general point, but filling stations have a rather
>shortages from employees without proof of wrongdoing?
unusual sales pattern (very high value, and ease of making off without
paying). All they can really do is have cameras (all of them seem to
have for years) and inform the police.
--
Roland Perry
Saxman
Dec 16, 2013, 8:50:02 AM12/16/13
to
On 16/12/2013 13:10, Roland Perry wrote:
> That could be a more general point, but filling stations have a rather
> unusual sales pattern (very high value, and ease of making off without
> paying). All they can really do is have cameras (all of them seem to
> have for years) and inform the police.
I think the threat of a deduction from wages is discourage 'friends' of
> That could be a more general point, but filling stations have a rather
> unusual sales pattern (very high value, and ease of making off without
> paying). All they can really do is have cameras (all of them seem to
> have for years) and inform the police.
the employee being encouraged to fill up and drive off.
David L. Martel
Dec 16, 2013, 9:05:05 AM12/16/13
to
Bob,
What is the normal procedure for selling gas at your son's shop?
Do the patrons pump and then pay? If so, what steps could your son take
to prevent this theft? If the employer does not have an SOP for this, I
can't see that blaming the employee would fly.
Do the patrons pay and then pump? If the employee did not correctly set
the pump to deliver the proper amount then the employee is at fault and I
side with the employer if the employee has been properly trained.
Good luck,
Dave M.
What is the normal procedure for selling gas at your son's shop?
Do the patrons pump and then pay? If so, what steps could your son take
to prevent this theft? If the employer does not have an SOP for this, I
can't see that blaming the employee would fly.
Do the patrons pay and then pump? If the employee did not correctly set
the pump to deliver the proper amount then the employee is at fault and I
side with the employer if the employee has been properly trained.
Good luck,
Dave M.
Robin
Dec 16, 2013, 9:50:02 AM12/16/13
to
> Surely the Court would not support that? Obviously the employee might
> be reluctant to take action but that does not alter the basic
> unfairness of such a policy.
Would you consider it equally unfair if the employer operated a bonus
> be reluctant to take action but that does not alter the basic
> unfairness of such a policy.
scheme: eg if there are no till shortages in a month you'll get a 10%
bonus?
So long as it is all set out clearly up front I don't see why that or
the more common employment contract in this case should be struck down
by a court/tribunal.
And as others have said it is all sanctioned (subject to the 10% limit
in retail - see s17 ERA 1996).
--
Robin
reply to address is (meant to be) valid
Sara Merriman
Dec 16, 2013, 10:30:05 AM12/16/13
to
In article <l8n3q5$d1k$1...@dont-email.me>, Robin <rb...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Surely the Court would not support that? Obviously the employee might
> > be reluctant to take action but that does not alter the basic
> > unfairness of such a policy.
>
> Would you consider it equally unfair if the employer operated a bonus
> scheme: eg if there are no till shortages in a month you'll get a 10%
> bonus?
>
I would find that less unfair: the employee is still getting the basic
> > Surely the Court would not support that? Obviously the employee might
> > be reluctant to take action but that does not alter the basic
> > unfairness of such a policy.
>
> Would you consider it equally unfair if the employer operated a bonus
> scheme: eg if there are no till shortages in a month you'll get a 10%
> bonus?
>
pay they're expecting.
Roland Perry
Dec 16, 2013, 11:15:02 AM12/16/13
to
In message <l8n14g$scc$1...@dont-email.me>, at 14:05:05 on Mon, 16 Dec
2013, David L. Martel <mart...@frontier.com> remarked:
stations" rather than "gas" and "gas shops") for people to pull up to a
pump and then have their number-plate recorded on CCTV (we universally
have such number-plates on the front as well as the rear).
Once the cashier has seen that the plate has been recorded, he activates
the pump and the patrons pay afterwards. If they drive off without
paying the police are informed.
At some petrol stations they have "drive through" payment windows, but
usually you have to walk inside (or in extremely rough areas pay through
a window in the wall).
Plus of course "pay at pump" where the patron has to have his credit
cards authorised before he can pump anything.
I don't think I've ever experienced a pre-pay system in the UK, but
perhaps in the very worst areas they may have a few.
--
Roland Perry
2013, David L. Martel <mart...@frontier.com> remarked:
> What is the normal procedure for selling gas at your son's shop?
> Do the patrons pump and then pay?
It's almost universal in the UK (where we have "petrol" and "petrol
> Do the patrons pump and then pay?
stations" rather than "gas" and "gas shops") for people to pull up to a
pump and then have their number-plate recorded on CCTV (we universally
have such number-plates on the front as well as the rear).
Once the cashier has seen that the plate has been recorded, he activates
the pump and the patrons pay afterwards. If they drive off without
paying the police are informed.
At some petrol stations they have "drive through" payment windows, but
usually you have to walk inside (or in extremely rough areas pay through
a window in the wall).
Plus of course "pay at pump" where the patron has to have his credit
cards authorised before he can pump anything.
I don't think I've ever experienced a pre-pay system in the UK, but
perhaps in the very worst areas they may have a few.
--
Roland Perry
Peter Crosland
Dec 16, 2013, 12:26:27 PM12/16/13
to
due to drive offs is fundamentally unreasonable since it is unlikely
that the employee can do anything to prevent it. It is up to the
employer to take adequate steps such as providing cameras to deal with
the problem.
--
Peter Crosland
Peter Crosland
Dec 16, 2013, 12:30:03 PM12/16/13
to
On 16/12/2013 14:05, David L. Martel wrote:
> Bob,
>
> What is the normal procedure for selling gas at your son's shop?
> Do the patrons pump and then pay? If so, what steps could your son take
> to prevent this theft? If the employer does not have an SOP for this, I
> can't see that blaming the employee would fly.
> Do the patrons pay and then pump? If the employee did not correctly set
> the pump to deliver the proper amount then the employee is at fault and I
> side with the employer if the employee has been properly trained.
In the UK, unlike the USA, the normal procedure is to pump and then pay.
> Bob,
>
> What is the normal procedure for selling gas at your son's shop?
> Do the patrons pump and then pay? If so, what steps could your son take
> to prevent this theft? If the employer does not have an SOP for this, I
> can't see that blaming the employee would fly.
> Do the patrons pay and then pump? If the employee did not correctly set
> the pump to deliver the proper amount then the employee is at fault and I
> side with the employer if the employee has been properly trained.
Hence the problem of drive offs.
--
Peter Crosland
Janitor of Lunacy
Dec 16, 2013, 1:50:50 PM12/16/13
to
"Peter Crosland" <g6...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:Mqidna38d4jcqjLP...@brightview.co.uk...
rule that contracting parties are at liberty to include whatever terms they
like, with the option to refuse to perform the contract on the grounds of
unreasonableness, I would think that such a term would be permitted, to give
what is called "business efficacy" to the contract[1] by protecting the
employer from deliberate or negligent mistakes made by the employee.
[1] I know that's a phrase relating to implied terms, but it should apply
mutatis mutandis.
Peter Crosland
Dec 16, 2013, 2:10:05 PM12/16/13
to
clearly in a dominant position. Furthermore it is quite evident on what
we have been told that the employee is/was not in any position to have
any influence on the situation.
--
Peter Crosland
polygonum
Dec 16, 2013, 2:15:06 PM12/16/13
to
On 16/12/2013 18:50, Janitor of Lunacy wrote:
>
>
off? Could easily be the best part of a couple of hundred pounds - more
if an HGV. The employee might be part time, on minimum wage, about to
leave, etc. So how can they be expected to pay back more than they would
earn, more than they are owed in arrears, in the meantime surviving on
nothing?
--
Rod
Clive George
Dec 16, 2013, 2:30:07 PM12/16/13
to
John Briggs
Dec 16, 2013, 2:35:02 PM12/16/13
to
On 16/12/2013 19:15, polygonum wrote:
--
John Briggs
Janitor of Lunacy
Dec 16, 2013, 2:55:03 PM12/16/13
to
"polygonum" <rmoud...@vrod.co.uk> wrote in message
news:bh91gh...@mid.individual.net...
salary, and do not cause the total to fall beneath the minimum wage, they
can continue until the loss is recovered. If the employee leaves, the
employer could sue for what is essentially a contractual liability, but of
course his chances of succeeding might be small. See section13 of the
Employment Rights Act 1996.
Fredxxx
Dec 16, 2013, 2:50:05 PM12/16/13
to
On 16/12/2013 16:15, Roland Perry wrote:
<snip>
> I don't think I've ever experienced a pre-pay system in the UK, but
> perhaps in the very worst areas they may have a few.
I have just once. It was in the early hours where the cashier wouldn't
allow me to draw fuel and in his worst pigeon English tried to explain
how he wanted to make a debenture on my card.
His English was so awful that I wasn't certain what he was saying and I
declined, going onto the next petrol station where all was straight forward!
<snip>
> I don't think I've ever experienced a pre-pay system in the UK, but
> perhaps in the very worst areas they may have a few.
allow me to draw fuel and in his worst pigeon English tried to explain
how he wanted to make a debenture on my card.
His English was so awful that I wasn't certain what he was saying and I
declined, going onto the next petrol station where all was straight forward!
Walt
Dec 16, 2013, 11:10:02 AM12/16/13
to
"Chris R" <inv...@invalid.munge.co.uk> wrote in
news:9fWdnRk8ksBZdDPP...@brightview.co.uk:
When I joined a large group of shops as Chief Accountant, I soon put a
stop to cashiers having to make up till shortages. Why? I soon
discovered that because they were having to make up till shortages, they
pocketed till "overs" - the next step was to intentionally short-change
customers to ensure the till was "over" at the end of the day!.
Walt
news:9fWdnRk8ksBZdDPP...@brightview.co.uk:
stop to cashiers having to make up till shortages. Why? I soon
discovered that because they were having to make up till shortages, they
pocketed till "overs" - the next step was to intentionally short-change
customers to ensure the till was "over" at the end of the day!.
Walt
theodo...@gmail.com
Dec 16, 2013, 12:50:21 PM12/16/13
to
There is no way on earth I would take that job.
zaax
Dec 16, 2013, 1:40:05 PM12/16/13
to
technology
---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
Andy Burns
Dec 16, 2013, 2:10:05 PM12/16/13
to
Roland Perry wrote:
> I don't think I've ever experienced a pre-pay system in the UK, but
> perhaps in the very worst areas they may have a few.
I've seen it in certain areas of Nottingham after dark, despite running
> I don't think I've ever experienced a pre-pay system in the UK, but
> perhaps in the very worst areas they may have a few.
on fumes I drove elsewhere rather than pay up-front
polygonum
Dec 16, 2013, 3:10:03 PM12/16/13
to
other on minimum wage plus, say, £1 (for experience, responsibility,
etc.). The one on minimum wage could not be made to pay. The other one
could.
I am also imagining some poor unemployed person on their first shift at
the filling station, suddenly becoming responsible for a debt they
cannot possibly discharge. They effectively could not refuse the job but
have to accept what amount, in my opinion, to unfair conditions. All
without any fair assessment of responsibility.
--
Rod
Tim Watts
Dec 16, 2013, 3:20:07 PM12/16/13
to
On Monday 16 December 2013 16:10 Walt wrote in uk.legal.moderated:
> When I joined a large group of shops as Chief Accountant, I soon put a
> stop to cashiers having to make up till shortages. Why? I soon
> discovered that because they were having to make up till shortages, they
> pocketed till "overs" - the next step was to intentionally short-change
> customers to ensure the till was "over" at the end of the day!.
Ah - the law of unintended consequences.
> When I joined a large group of shops as Chief Accountant, I soon put a
> stop to cashiers having to make up till shortages. Why? I soon
> discovered that because they were having to make up till shortages, they
> pocketed till "overs" - the next step was to intentionally short-change
> customers to ensure the till was "over" at the end of the day!.
Well done sir!
--
Tim Watts Personal Blog: http://squiddy.blog.dionic.net/
http://www.sensorly.com/ Crowd mapping of 2G/3G/4G mobile signal coverage
Mark Goodge
Dec 16, 2013, 4:25:19 PM12/16/13
to
On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 18:40:05 +0000, zaax put finger to keyboard and typed:
>Peter Crosland wrote:
>> On 16/12/2013 14:05, David L. Martel wrote:
>>> Bob,
>>>
>>> What is the normal procedure for selling gas at your son's shop?
>>> Do the patrons pump and then pay? If so, what steps could your son
>>> take
>>> to prevent this theft? If the employer does not have an SOP for this, I
>>> can't see that blaming the employee would fly.
>>> Do the patrons pay and then pump? If the employee did not
>>> correctly set
>>> the pump to deliver the proper amount then the employee is at fault and I
>>> side with the employer if the employee has been properly trained.
>>
>> In the UK, unlike the USA, the normal procedure is to pump and then pay.
>> Hence the problem of drive offs.
>>
>Tesco's have use card and pump therefore other stations can use the same
>technology
Just because they can, doesn't mean they want to or that they ought to. It
suits Tesco because it fits their retail operation. It doesn't necessarily
fit other petrol retailers.
Mark
--
Please take a short survey on salary perceptions: http://meyu.eu/am
My blog: http://mark.goodge.co.uk
>Peter Crosland wrote:
>> On 16/12/2013 14:05, David L. Martel wrote:
>>> Bob,
>>>
>>> What is the normal procedure for selling gas at your son's shop?
>>> Do the patrons pump and then pay? If so, what steps could your son
>>> take
>>> to prevent this theft? If the employer does not have an SOP for this, I
>>> can't see that blaming the employee would fly.
>>> Do the patrons pay and then pump? If the employee did not
>>> correctly set
>>> the pump to deliver the proper amount then the employee is at fault and I
>>> side with the employer if the employee has been properly trained.
>>
>> In the UK, unlike the USA, the normal procedure is to pump and then pay.
>> Hence the problem of drive offs.
>>
>Tesco's have use card and pump therefore other stations can use the same
>technology
suits Tesco because it fits their retail operation. It doesn't necessarily
fit other petrol retailers.
Mark
--
Please take a short survey on salary perceptions: http://meyu.eu/am
My blog: http://mark.goodge.co.uk
Nightjar
Dec 16, 2013, 4:40:14 PM12/16/13
to
On 16/12/2013 18:40, zaax wrote:
> Peter Crosland wrote:
....
Tesco, as they give Clubcard points. The prepay limit is set at £89,
which seems to me to be a slightly odd amount to choose.
Colin Bignell
> Peter Crosland wrote:
....
>> In the UK, unlike the USA, the normal procedure is to pump and then pay.
>> Hence the problem of drive offs.
>>
> Tesco's have use card and pump therefore other stations can use the same
> technology
My local Esso station has pay at the pump. They must have a link to
>> Hence the problem of drive offs.
>>
> Tesco's have use card and pump therefore other stations can use the same
> technology
Tesco, as they give Clubcard points. The prepay limit is set at £89,
which seems to me to be a slightly odd amount to choose.
Colin Bignell
Janitor of Lunacy
Dec 16, 2013, 5:00:08 PM12/16/13
to
<theodo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:5090ae91-39f3-4491...@googlegroups.com...
Not nothing, the maximum deduction is 10% of gross pay (per payment period),
so you'd end up working for 90% of salary until the shortfall was recovered.
Mark Goodge
Dec 16, 2013, 5:10:05 PM12/16/13
to
On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 21:40:14 +0000, Nightjar put finger to keyboard and
typed:
That's because floor limits (the point at which more complex authorisation
is necessary) are usually set at nice round numbers such as £70, £80, £90,
£100 etc. Because the pump operator doesn't want to hit floor limits, the
dispensing limit is set to be £1 less than the floor limit for that site.
(And why £1 less, not 1p less? Because petrol buyers, even when paying
automatically by card, still have a habit of preferring to spend round
numbers of pounds. So a pump limit of £89.00 will be far less irritating to
many people than a limit of £89.99)
typed:
is necessary) are usually set at nice round numbers such as £70, £80, £90,
£100 etc. Because the pump operator doesn't want to hit floor limits, the
dispensing limit is set to be £1 less than the floor limit for that site.
(And why £1 less, not 1p less? Because petrol buyers, even when paying
automatically by card, still have a habit of preferring to spend round
numbers of pounds. So a pump limit of £89.00 will be far less irritating to
many people than a limit of £89.99)
Zapp Brannigan
Dec 16, 2013, 5:25:04 PM12/16/13
to
> There is no way on earth I would take that job.
Me neither, but then the Jobcentre would stop our benefits for declining
work.
Robin Bignall
Dec 16, 2013, 5:30:15 PM12/16/13
to
those barricaded 24-hour filling stations with only one person on duty.
--
Robin Bignall
Herts, England
Robin
Dec 16, 2013, 6:00:05 PM12/16/13
to
<snip>
decision that deductions provided for in the employment contract, and
permitted by ERA 1996, were unlawful? (I suspect USDAW and their legal
advisers would very much like to know if there is a practicable
challenge.)
>> I don't think it's ever been tested in the courts, but given the
>> general rule that contracting parties are at liberty to include
>> whatever terms they like, with the option to refuse to perform the
>> contract on the grounds of unreasonableness, I would think that such
>> a term would be permitted, to give what is called "business
>> efficacy" to the contract[1] by protecting the employer from
>> deliberate or negligent mistakes made by the employee. [1] I know
>> that's a phrase relating to implied terms, but it should
>> apply mutatis mutandis.
>
> That would apply only if both parties were equal but the employer is
> clearly in a dominant position. Furthermore it is quite evident on
> what we have been told that the employee is/was not in any position
> to have any influence on the situation.
What law please do you think the courts would use to arrive at the
>> general rule that contracting parties are at liberty to include
>> whatever terms they like, with the option to refuse to perform the
>> contract on the grounds of unreasonableness, I would think that such
>> a term would be permitted, to give what is called "business
>> efficacy" to the contract[1] by protecting the employer from
>> deliberate or negligent mistakes made by the employee. [1] I know
>> that's a phrase relating to implied terms, but it should
>> apply mutatis mutandis.
>
> That would apply only if both parties were equal but the employer is
> clearly in a dominant position. Furthermore it is quite evident on
> what we have been told that the employee is/was not in any position
> to have any influence on the situation.
decision that deductions provided for in the employment contract, and
permitted by ERA 1996, were unlawful? (I suspect USDAW and their legal
advisers would very much like to know if there is a practicable
challenge.)
John Briggs
Dec 16, 2013, 6:15:06 PM12/16/13
to
the filling station they don't trust, not you...
--
John Briggs
Nightjar
Dec 16, 2013, 8:00:08 PM12/16/13
to
On 16/12/2013 22:10, Mark Goodge wrote:
....
> That's because floor limits (the point at which more complex authorisation
> is necessary) are usually set at nice round numbers such as £70, £80, £90,
> £100 etc. Because the pump operator doesn't want to hit floor limits, the
> dispensing limit is set to be £1 less than the floor limit for that site.
>
> (And why £1 less, not 1p less? Because petrol buyers, even when paying
> automatically by card, still have a habit of preferring to spend round
> numbers of pounds. So a pump limit of £89.00 will be far less irritating to
> many people than a limit of £89.99)
It must be one of the few businesses, other than Poundland, where things
> is necessary) are usually set at nice round numbers such as £70, £80, £90,
> £100 etc. Because the pump operator doesn't want to hit floor limits, the
> dispensing limit is set to be £1 less than the floor limit for that site.
>
> (And why £1 less, not 1p less? Because petrol buyers, even when paying
> automatically by card, still have a habit of preferring to spend round
> numbers of pounds. So a pump limit of £89.00 will be far less irritating to
> many people than a limit of £89.99)
are sold in whole pounds and not £X.99.
Colin Bignell
Roland Perry
Dec 17, 2013, 3:50:19 AM12/17/13
to
In message <gJ6dnX9UNJahPDLP...@giganews.com>, at 01:00:08
on Tue, 17 Dec 2013, Nightjar <c...@insert.my.surname.here.me.uk>
remarked:
emerged as a £1.49 shop. I kid you not.
--
Roland Perry
on Tue, 17 Dec 2013, Nightjar <c...@insert.my.surname.here.me.uk>
remarked:
>It must be one of the few businesses, other than Poundland, where
>things are sold in whole pounds and not £X.99.
My local pound store (in the defunct Woolworths) was recently re-let and
>things are sold in whole pounds and not £X.99.
emerged as a £1.49 shop. I kid you not.
--
Roland Perry
Roland Perry
Dec 17, 2013, 3:45:07 AM12/17/13
to
In message <vcrua9h2teimro186...@news.markshouse.net>, at
21:25:19 on Mon, 16 Dec 2013, Mark Goodge
<use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> remarked:
(I've not bought fuel at a Sainsbury's recently enough to remember).
--
Roland Perry
21:25:19 on Mon, 16 Dec 2013, Mark Goodge
<use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> remarked:
>>Tesco's have use card and pump therefore other stations can use the same
>>technology
>
>Just because they can, doesn't mean they want to or that they ought to. It
>suits Tesco because it fits their retail operation. It doesn't necessarily
>fit other petrol retailers.
It seems to suit many supermarkets; ASDA and Morrisons both have it too
>>technology
>
>Just because they can, doesn't mean they want to or that they ought to. It
>suits Tesco because it fits their retail operation. It doesn't necessarily
>fit other petrol retailers.
(I've not bought fuel at a Sainsbury's recently enough to remember).
--
Roland Perry
Chris R
Dec 17, 2013, 4:50:02 AM12/17/13
to
>
>
> "Roland Perry" wrote in message news:wvrF5Tby...@perry.co.uk...
must slash shop sales. Supermarkets don't rely on customers getting
groceries while paying for fuel.
I have long been puzzled by the filling station business model which keeps
the main asset, the fuel pumps, blocked up with parked cars while customers
shop for a packet of sweets. Losing fuel customers due to queues can't be
good business. On the other hand, I'm most reluctant to spend time shopping
when i know someone is waiting behind my car at the pump.
--
Chris R
pcb1962
Dec 17, 2013, 4:55:02 AM12/17/13
to
On 16/12/13 21:25, Mark Goodge wrote:
>
> Just because they can, doesn't mean they want to or that they ought to. It
> suits Tesco because it fits their retail operation. It doesn't necessarily
> fit other petrol retailers.
Indeed, the last thing a filling station wants is for you to be able to
>
> Just because they can, doesn't mean they want to or that they ought to. It
> suits Tesco because it fits their retail operation. It doesn't necessarily
> fit other petrol retailers.
fill up without setting foot in their shop, where every single item has
a far higher profit margin on it than the fuel.
Peter Crosland
Dec 17, 2013, 6:10:02 AM12/17/13
to
facts given, was not in a position to prevent the loss and is not
responsible for it. Furthermore it would be likely to reduce the
employee's wage below the the statutory minimum.
--
Peter Crosland
Chris R
Dec 17, 2013, 6:35:05 AM12/17/13
to
>
>
> "Peter Crosland" wrote in message
> news:746dnYazuZKirS3P...@brightview.co.uk...
--
Chris R
========legalstuff========
I post to be helpful but not claiming any expertise nor intending
anyone to rely on what I say. Nothing I post here will create a
professional relationship or duty of care. I do not provide legal
services to the public. My posts here refer only to English law except
where specified and are subject to the terms (including limitations of
liability) at http://www.clarityincorporatelaw.co.uk/legalstuff.html
======end legalstuff======
Message has been deleted
Fredxxx
Dec 17, 2013, 6:25:02 AM12/17/13
to
get-out regarding "reasonable". Others mention drive-offs where they
had to pay. Also bars where the staff were collectively punished.
Furthermore, the 10% limit doesn't apply to the final pay packet if the
employee leaves.
Ian Jackson
Dec 17, 2013, 6:40:02 AM12/17/13
to
In message <4L-dnduqgPYCgC3P...@brightview.co.uk>, Chris R
<inv...@invalid.munge.co.uk> writes
for at least the last five years. However, as far as I know, it has have
never ever been put into operation - even when whole forecourt was
recently refurbished, and the pumps replaced. As you say, they probably
want the additional shop sales.
There's also another local filling station where they have PATP pumps -
but there's a fair chance that is isn't working. And if it IS working,
there's a fair chance that the receipt printer is out of paper, and
doesn't dispense receipts.
encouraged to) move their cars to while they go and pay (without
immediately raising the suspicion that they are intending to drive off).
--
Ian
<inv...@invalid.munge.co.uk> writes
>
>>
>>
>> "Roland Perry" wrote in message news:wvrF5Tby...@perry.co.uk...
>> In message <vcrua9h2teimro186...@news.markshouse.net>, at
>> 21:25:19 on Mon, 16 Dec 2013, Mark Goodge
>> <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> remarked:
>> >>Tesco's have use card and pump therefore other stations can use the same
>> >>technology
>> >
>> >Just because they can, doesn't mean they want to or that they ought to.
>> >It
>> >suits Tesco because it fits their retail operation. It doesn't
>> >necessarily
>> >fit other petrol retailers.
>>
>> It seems to suit many supermarkets; ASDA and Morrisons both have it too
>> (I've not bought fuel at a Sainsbury's recently enough to remember).
>
>Presumably it hasn't caught on with independent filling stations because it
>must slash shop sales. Supermarkets don't rely on customers getting
>groceries while paying for fuel.
>
One of my fairly local filling stations has had pay-at-the-pumps pumps
>>
>>
>> "Roland Perry" wrote in message news:wvrF5Tby...@perry.co.uk...
>> In message <vcrua9h2teimro186...@news.markshouse.net>, at
>> 21:25:19 on Mon, 16 Dec 2013, Mark Goodge
>> <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> remarked:
>> >>Tesco's have use card and pump therefore other stations can use the same
>> >>technology
>> >
>> >Just because they can, doesn't mean they want to or that they ought to.
>> >It
>> >suits Tesco because it fits their retail operation. It doesn't
>> >necessarily
>> >fit other petrol retailers.
>>
>> It seems to suit many supermarkets; ASDA and Morrisons both have it too
>> (I've not bought fuel at a Sainsbury's recently enough to remember).
>
>Presumably it hasn't caught on with independent filling stations because it
>must slash shop sales. Supermarkets don't rely on customers getting
>groceries while paying for fuel.
>
for at least the last five years. However, as far as I know, it has have
never ever been put into operation - even when whole forecourt was
recently refurbished, and the pumps replaced. As you say, they probably
want the additional shop sales.
There's also another local filling station where they have PATP pumps -
but there's a fair chance that is isn't working. And if it IS working,
there's a fair chance that the receipt printer is out of paper, and
doesn't dispense receipts.
.
>I have long been puzzled by the filling station business model which keeps
>the main asset, the fuel pumps, blocked up with parked cars while customers
>shop for a packet of sweets. Losing fuel customers due to queues can't be
>good business. On the other hand, I'm most reluctant to spend time shopping
>when i know someone is waiting behind my car at the pump.
+1. If possible, they should have a place where fillers-up can (and be
>I have long been puzzled by the filling station business model which keeps
>the main asset, the fuel pumps, blocked up with parked cars while customers
>shop for a packet of sweets. Losing fuel customers due to queues can't be
>good business. On the other hand, I'm most reluctant to spend time shopping
>when i know someone is waiting behind my car at the pump.
encouraged to) move their cars to while they go and pay (without
immediately raising the suspicion that they are intending to drive off).
--
Ian
Scion
Dec 17, 2013, 7:15:03 AM12/17/13
to
Chris R put finger to keyboard:
The profit margin on fuel *to the filling station owner* can be peanuts
compared to the profit margin on goods in the shop.
compared to the profit margin on goods in the shop.
Robin
Dec 17, 2013, 9:00:09 AM12/17/13
to
> Furthermore it would be likely to reduce the
> employee's wage below the the statutory minimum.
Deductions which took pay (as defined) below the NMW *would* be
> employee's wage below the the statutory minimum.
unlawful - a breach of the NMW legislation.
Chris R
Dec 17, 2013, 9:20:14 AM12/17/13
to
>
>
> "Scion" wrote in message news:l8pf3n$7s7$3...@dont-email.me...
>
> Chris R put finger to keyboard:
>
>
> >>
> >> "Roland Perry" wrote in message news:wvrF5Tby...@perry.co.uk...
> >> In message <vcrua9h2teimro186...@news.markshouse.net>, at
> >> 21:25:19 on Mon, 16 Dec 2013, Mark Goodge
> >> <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> remarked:
>
> Chris R put finger to keyboard:
>
>
> >>
> >> "Roland Perry" wrote in message news:wvrF5Tby...@perry.co.uk...
> >> In message <vcrua9h2teimro186...@news.markshouse.net>, at
> >> 21:25:19 on Mon, 16 Dec 2013, Mark Goodge
> >> <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> remarked:
>
> > Presumably it hasn't caught on with independent filling stations because
> > it must slash shop sales. Supermarkets don't rely on customers getting
> > groceries while paying for fuel.
> >
> > I have long been puzzled by the filling station business model which
> > keeps the main asset, the fuel pumps, blocked up with parked cars while
> > customers shop for a packet of sweets. Losing fuel customers due to
> > queues can't be good business. On the other hand, I'm most reluctant to
> > spend time shopping when i know someone is waiting behind my car at the
> > pump.
>
> The profit margin on fuel *to the filling station owner* can be peanuts
> compared to the profit margin on goods in the shop.
As a percentage, but the casual fuel-shopper is not likely to spend �75 in
> > it must slash shop sales. Supermarkets don't rely on customers getting
> > groceries while paying for fuel.
> >
> > I have long been puzzled by the filling station business model which
> > keeps the main asset, the fuel pumps, blocked up with parked cars while
> > customers shop for a packet of sweets. Losing fuel customers due to
> > queues can't be good business. On the other hand, I'm most reluctant to
> > spend time shopping when i know someone is waiting behind my car at the
> > pump.
>
> The profit margin on fuel *to the filling station owner* can be peanuts
> compared to the profit margin on goods in the shop.
the shop.
--
Chris R
Message has been deleted
Roland Perry
Dec 17, 2013, 10:10:02 AM12/17/13
to
In message <xoSdnfV5-tX3wC3P...@brightview.co.uk>, at
14:20:14 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013, Chris R <inv...@invalid.munge.co.uk>
remarked:
50% in a £3 sandwich.
--
Roland Perry
14:20:14 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013, Chris R <inv...@invalid.munge.co.uk>
remarked:
>> The profit margin on fuel *to the filling station owner* can be peanuts
>> compared to the profit margin on goods in the shop.
>
>As a percentage, but the casual fuel-shopper is not likely to spend £75 in
>the shop.
There's about £3.80 of retail margin in that much petrol, and at least
>> compared to the profit margin on goods in the shop.
>
>As a percentage, but the casual fuel-shopper is not likely to spend £75 in
>the shop.
50% in a £3 sandwich.
--
Roland Perry
Adam Funk
Dec 17, 2013, 11:05:10 AM12/17/13
to
On 2013-12-16, Walt wrote:
> "Chris R" <inv...@invalid.munge.co.uk> wrote in
> news:9fWdnRk8ksBZdDPP...@brightview.co.uk:
>> Isn't the point rather that some retail businesses just deduct till
>> shortages from employees without proof of wrongdoing?
> "Chris R" <inv...@invalid.munge.co.uk> wrote in
> news:9fWdnRk8ksBZdDPP...@brightview.co.uk:
>> Isn't the point rather that some retail businesses just deduct till
>> shortages from employees without proof of wrongdoing?
>
> When I joined a large group of shops as Chief Accountant, I soon put a
> stop to cashiers having to make up till shortages. Why? I soon
> discovered that because they were having to make up till shortages, they
> pocketed till "overs" - the next step was to intentionally short-change
> customers to ensure the till was "over" at the end of the day!.
If you force people to meet targets, they will find ways to meet them!
> When I joined a large group of shops as Chief Accountant, I soon put a
> stop to cashiers having to make up till shortages. Why? I soon
> discovered that because they were having to make up till shortages, they
> pocketed till "overs" - the next step was to intentionally short-change
> customers to ensure the till was "over" at the end of the day!.
fred
Dec 17, 2013, 10:25:03 AM12/17/13
to
"Chris R" <inv...@invalid.munge.co.uk> wrote in
news:xoSdnfV5-tX3wC3P...@brightview.co.uk:
>>
>> "Scion" wrote in message news:l8pf3n$7s7$3...@dont-email.me...
>>
>> "Scion" wrote in message news:l8pf3n$7s7$3...@dont-email.me...
>>
>> The profit margin on fuel *to the filling station owner* can be
>> peanuts compared to the profit margin on goods in the shop.
>
> As a percentage, but the casual fuel-shopper is not likely to spend
> �75 in the shop.
Fuel margins can be as low as 1 - 1.5% so 75quid gets 75 - 112p
>> peanuts compared to the profit margin on goods in the shop.
>
> As a percentage, but the casual fuel-shopper is not likely to spend
> �75 in the shop.
Margin on sweeties & pop is 50 - 100% so just a couple of quid on those
nets more than the petrol sale.
--
fred
Scion
Dec 17, 2013, 12:05:10 PM12/17/13
to
Roland Perry put finger to keyboard:
Production costs, tax and duty make up around 96% of the cost of fuel at
the pump, so there's only around 5p a litre to play with - and that's
before delivery and operating costs are accounted for.
And with a franchise, some of the fuel margin - perhaps 50% - will go to
the franchisor with the remainder going to the franchisee.
A sandwich and cup of coffee could quadruple an operator's profit, even
for a customer who has filled their car to the brim.
A regular weekly shop would probably get you a reserved parking space :-)
the pump, so there's only around 5p a litre to play with - and that's
before delivery and operating costs are accounted for.
And with a franchise, some of the fuel margin - perhaps 50% - will go to
the franchisor with the remainder going to the franchisee.
A sandwich and cup of coffee could quadruple an operator's profit, even
for a customer who has filled their car to the brim.
A regular weekly shop would probably get you a reserved parking space :-)
Chris K
Dec 17, 2013, 12:50:03 PM12/17/13
to
transaction, and then forget the £1 and put through the full transaction
without C&P. Makes sure there is some validity in the card before
fuelling, presumably they take the risk that after the initial £1 the
transaction turns out to be fraudulant.
Might explain the odd £1 in the floor limit.
Chris K
Robin Bignall
Dec 17, 2013, 5:45:04 PM12/17/13
to
enough to clear all the pumps.
Chris R
Dec 18, 2013, 4:25:03 AM12/18/13
to
>
>
> "Robin Bignall" wrote in message
> news:lrk1b9584shberlm7...@4ax.com...
>
> On Tue, 17 Dec 2013 11:40:02 +0000, Ian Jackson
> <ianREMOVET...@g3ohx.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >In message <4L-dnduqgPYCgC3P...@brightview.co.uk>, Chris R
> ><inv...@invalid.munge.co.uk> writes
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> "Roland Perry" wrote in message news:wvrF5Tby...@perry.co.uk...
> >>> In message <vcrua9h2teimro186...@news.markshouse.net>,
> >>> at
> >>> 21:25:19 on Mon, 16 Dec 2013, Mark Goodge
> >>> <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> remarked:
> On Tue, 17 Dec 2013 11:40:02 +0000, Ian Jackson
> <ianREMOVET...@g3ohx.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >In message <4L-dnduqgPYCgC3P...@brightview.co.uk>, Chris R
> ><inv...@invalid.munge.co.uk> writes
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> "Roland Perry" wrote in message news:wvrF5Tby...@perry.co.uk...
> >>> In message <vcrua9h2teimro186...@news.markshouse.net>,
> >>> at
> >>> 21:25:19 on Mon, 16 Dec 2013, Mark Goodge
> >>> <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> remarked:
> >>I have long been puzzled by the filling station business model which
> >>keeps
> >>the main asset, the fuel pumps, blocked up with parked cars while
> >>customers
> >>shop for a packet of sweets. Losing fuel customers due to queues can't
> >>be
> >>good business. On the other hand, I'm most reluctant to spend time
> >>shopping
> >>when i know someone is waiting behind my car at the pump.
> >
> >+1. If possible, they should have a place where fillers-up can (and be
> >encouraged to) move their cars to while they go and pay (without
> >immediately raising the suspicion that they are intending to drive off).
>
> +1 more. My local BP / M&S has a few extra parking spaces, but far from
> enough to clear all the pumps.
I don't know if the technology allows the filling station to "stack"
> >>keeps
> >>the main asset, the fuel pumps, blocked up with parked cars while
> >>customers
> >>shop for a packet of sweets. Losing fuel customers due to queues can't
> >>be
> >>good business. On the other hand, I'm most reluctant to spend time
> >>shopping
> >>when i know someone is waiting behind my car at the pump.
> >
> >+1. If possible, they should have a place where fillers-up can (and be
> >encouraged to) move their cars to while they go and pay (without
> >immediately raising the suspicion that they are intending to drive off).
>
> +1 more. My local BP / M&S has a few extra parking spaces, but far from
> enough to clear all the pumps.
customers for the same pump. Does one customer's fuel have to be paid for
before the next can fuel from the same pump? Certainly it would cause
confusion if customers started going to the till out of order.
--
Chris R
Tim Watts
Dec 18, 2013, 5:10:08 AM12/18/13
to
On Wednesday 18 December 2013 09:25 Chris R wrote in uk.legal.moderated:
> I don't know if the technology allows the filling station to "stack"
> customers for the same pump. Does one customer's fuel have to be paid for
> before the next can fuel from the same pump? Certainly it would cause
> confusion if customers started going to the till out of order.
You have been able to dispense from most pumps before the previous customer
> I don't know if the technology allows the filling station to "stack"
> customers for the same pump. Does one customer's fuel have to be paid for
> before the next can fuel from the same pump? Certainly it would cause
> confusion if customers started going to the till out of order.
has paid for as long as I can remember.
This is one of the reasons they tell you the amount when you pay.
It makes the situation no worse than if it were not possible - th eother
month, some lady tried to pay for my fuel because she gave the clerk the
wrong pump number. Luckily for her, I overheard and intervened. I think she
would have actually have paid it!
Wonder where that would have left me, legally ;->
--
Tim Watts Personal Blog: http://squiddy.blog.dionic.net/
http://www.sensorly.com/ Crowd mapping of 2G/3G/4G mobile signal coverage
Ian Jackson
Dec 18, 2013, 5:15:06 AM12/18/13
to
In message <xvSdnVb3IMtW9CzP...@brightview.co.uk>, Chris R
You're right, of course. Vacating the pump as soon as you've filled up
could indeed cause a problem. Also, I think a pump does not normally
'clear down' until you've paid (either automatically, or a manual
re-set). A solution would be for the pump to dispense a queue number,
which you give to the cashier - provided the printer always worked.
--
Ian
could indeed cause a problem. Also, I think a pump does not normally
'clear down' until you've paid (either automatically, or a manual
re-set). A solution would be for the pump to dispense a queue number,
which you give to the cashier - provided the printer always worked.
--
Ian
Tim Jackson
Dec 18, 2013, 5:45:03 AM12/18/13
to
On Wed, 18 Dec 2013 09:25:03 +0000, Chris R wrote...
> I don't know if the technology allows the filling station to "stack"
> customers for the same pump. Does one customer's fuel have to be paid for
> before the next can fuel from the same pump? Certainly it would cause
> confusion if customers started going to the till out of order.
I've been in this situation. The woman in front of me at our local
petrol station filled her tank, then parked in a parking space and
headed off into the mini-supermarket where you pay. Meanwhile, I filled
my tank and and also went in to pay.
As I was returning to my car, it occurred to me that the amount I had
paid was a bit less than it should have been, so I went back to query
it. I had in fact paid for the woman in front (who was still wandering
around the supermarket doing some shopping).
Their system had indeed stacked the transactions up, but the assistant
at the till hadn't realised we were paying out of order and just charged
me the first amount listed against the pump number. After some
discussion amongst the staff, they managed to charge me the difference
to make up what I owed. Hopefully they also charged the other woman the
correct amount, but she was still shopping when I left.
--
Tim Jackson
ne...@timjackson.invalid
(Change '.invalid' to '.plus.com' to reply direct)
> I don't know if the technology allows the filling station to "stack"
> customers for the same pump. Does one customer's fuel have to be paid for
> before the next can fuel from the same pump? Certainly it would cause
> confusion if customers started going to the till out of order.
petrol station filled her tank, then parked in a parking space and
headed off into the mini-supermarket where you pay. Meanwhile, I filled
my tank and and also went in to pay.
As I was returning to my car, it occurred to me that the amount I had
paid was a bit less than it should have been, so I went back to query
it. I had in fact paid for the woman in front (who was still wandering
around the supermarket doing some shopping).
Their system had indeed stacked the transactions up, but the assistant
at the till hadn't realised we were paying out of order and just charged
me the first amount listed against the pump number. After some
discussion amongst the staff, they managed to charge me the difference
to make up what I owed. Hopefully they also charged the other woman the
correct amount, but she was still shopping when I left.
--
Tim Jackson
ne...@timjackson.invalid
(Change '.invalid' to '.plus.com' to reply direct)
Andy Burns
Dec 18, 2013, 4:41:52 AM12/18/13
to
Chris R wrote:
> I have long been puzzled by the filling station business model which keeps
> the main asset, the fuel pumps, blocked up with parked cars while customers
> shop for a packet of sweets.
I avoid the two ASDAs that I'm aware of having drive through payment
> I have long been puzzled by the filling station business model which keeps
> the main asset, the fuel pumps, blocked up with parked cars while customers
> shop for a packet of sweets.
kiosks, they seem to think having a single kiosk manned is acceptable.
John Briggs
Dec 18, 2013, 9:45:27 AM12/18/13
to
On 18/12/2013 10:10, Tim Watts wrote:
> On Wednesday 18 December 2013 09:25 Chris R wrote in uk.legal.moderated:
>
>
>> I don't know if the technology allows the filling station to "stack"
>> customers for the same pump. Does one customer's fuel have to be paid for
>> before the next can fuel from the same pump? Certainly it would cause
>> confusion if customers started going to the till out of order.
>
> You have been able to dispense from most pumps before the previous customer
> has paid for as long as I can remember.
>
> This is one of the reasons they tell you the amount when you pay.
>
> It makes the situation no worse than if it were not possible - th eother
> month, some lady tried to pay for my fuel because she gave the clerk the
> wrong pump number. Luckily for her, I overheard and intervened. I think she
> would have actually have paid it!
>
> Wonder where that would have left me, legally ;->
The real question is: where would that have left her, legally? You could
> On Wednesday 18 December 2013 09:25 Chris R wrote in uk.legal.moderated:
>
>
>> I don't know if the technology allows the filling station to "stack"
>> customers for the same pump. Does one customer's fuel have to be paid for
>> before the next can fuel from the same pump? Certainly it would cause
>> confusion if customers started going to the till out of order.
>
> You have been able to dispense from most pumps before the previous customer
> has paid for as long as I can remember.
>
> This is one of the reasons they tell you the amount when you pay.
>
> It makes the situation no worse than if it were not possible - th eother
> month, some lady tried to pay for my fuel because she gave the clerk the
> wrong pump number. Luckily for her, I overheard and intervened. I think she
> would have actually have paid it!
>
> Wonder where that would have left me, legally ;->
still pay for yours (I know, because that happened to me once.)
--
John Briggs
Nightjar
Dec 18, 2013, 10:40:09 AM12/18/13
to
Colin Bignell
Roland Perry
Dec 18, 2013, 11:30:05 AM12/18/13
to
In message <3N6dnSdT1JqwXCzP...@giganews.com>, at 15:40:09
on Wed, 18 Dec 2013, Nightjar <c...@insert.my.surname.here.me.uk>
Meanwhile, one of the two lightbulbs I bought for £1.49 on Monday has
already failed...
--
Roland Perry
on Wed, 18 Dec 2013, Nightjar <c...@insert.my.surname.here.me.uk>
remarked:
>>> It must be one of the few businesses, other than Poundland, where
>>> things are sold in whole pounds and not £X.99.
>>
>> My local pound store (in the defunct Woolworths) was recently re-let and
>> emerged as a £1.49 shop. I kid you not.
>
>I wonder how many tonnes of pennies they get through in a year.
Probably no more than all those other shops which sell things for £xx.99
>>> It must be one of the few businesses, other than Poundland, where
>>> things are sold in whole pounds and not £X.99.
>>
>> My local pound store (in the defunct Woolworths) was recently re-let and
>> emerged as a £1.49 shop. I kid you not.
>
>I wonder how many tonnes of pennies they get through in a year.
Meanwhile, one of the two lightbulbs I bought for £1.49 on Monday has
already failed...
--
Roland Perry
Message has been deleted
Roland Perry
Dec 18, 2013, 11:55:02 AM12/18/13
to
In message <87ob4ex...@news2.kororaa.com>, at 16:45:10 on Wed, 18
Dec 2013, August West <aug...@kororaa.com> remarked:
It's not really worth making a special journey to complain.
--
Roland Perry
Dec 2013, August West <aug...@kororaa.com> remarked:
>> Meanwhile, one of the two lightbulbs I bought for £1.49 on Monday has
>> already failed...
>
>SoGA s.14?
>> already failed...
>
It's not really worth making a special journey to complain.
--
Roland Perry
Message has been deleted
Ian Jackson
Dec 18, 2013, 12:45:07 PM12/18/13
to
In message <aTMPGeZs...@perry.co.uk>, Roland Perry
<rol...@perry.co.uk> writes
High Wycombe used to have a 99p Shop, but I think it closed fairly
recently (probably due to competition from a much larger Pound Shop
which opened on the other side of the road). Whenever I bought anything
at the 99p Shop, I was tempted to tell the cashier to keep the change
(but never did).
--
Ian
<rol...@perry.co.uk> writes
recently (probably due to competition from a much larger Pound Shop
which opened on the other side of the road). Whenever I bought anything
at the 99p Shop, I was tempted to tell the cashier to keep the change
(but never did).
--
Ian
Nightjar
Dec 18, 2013, 1:35:06 PM12/18/13
to
On 18/12/2013 16:30, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <3N6dnSdT1JqwXCzP...@giganews.com>, at 15:40:09
> on Wed, 18 Dec 2013, Nightjar <c...@insert.my.surname.here.me.uk> remarked:
>>>> It must be one of the few businesses, other than Poundland, where
>>>> things are sold in whole pounds and not £X.99.
>>>
>>> My local pound store (in the defunct Woolworths) was recently re-let and
>>> emerged as a £1.49 shop. I kid you not.
>>
>> I wonder how many tonnes of pennies they get through in a year.
>
> Probably no more than all those other shops which sell things for £xx.99
I would have thought a lot more, given that in 2012 only 54% of retail
> In message <3N6dnSdT1JqwXCzP...@giganews.com>, at 15:40:09
> on Wed, 18 Dec 2013, Nightjar <c...@insert.my.surname.here.me.uk> remarked:
>>>> It must be one of the few businesses, other than Poundland, where
>>>> things are sold in whole pounds and not £X.99.
>>>
>>> My local pound store (in the defunct Woolworths) was recently re-let and
>>> emerged as a £1.49 shop. I kid you not.
>>
>> I wonder how many tonnes of pennies they get through in a year.
>
> Probably no more than all those other shops which sell things for £xx.99
sales were paid in cash, while this sort of shop seems to deal
predominantly or even exclusively in cash.
> Meanwhile, one of the two lightbulbs I bought for £1.49 on Monday has
> already failed...
Colin Bignell
Simon Finnigan
Dec 18, 2013, 2:55:11 PM12/18/13
to
Roland Perry
Dec 18, 2013, 5:25:05 PM12/18/13
to
In message <8eidnfRor4ZndCzP...@giganews.com>, at 18:35:06
bought at the supermarket, rather than by what's bought at the £0.99,
£1.99 etc stores.
>> Meanwhile, one of the two lightbulbs I bought for £1.49 on Monday has
>> already failed...
>
>Presumably not LEDs at that price?
No. If I could find a decently priced R63 LED I'd buy one.
--
Roland Perry
>>>> My local pound store (in the defunct Woolworths) was recently re-let and
>>>> emerged as a £1.49 shop. I kid you not.
>>>
>>> I wonder how many tonnes of pennies they get through in a year.
>>
>> Probably no more than all those other shops which sell things for £xx.99
>
>I would have thought a lot more, given that in 2012 only 54% of retail
>sales were paid in cash, while this sort of shop seems to deal
>predominantly or even exclusively in cash.
But retail sales stats are dominated by trolley loads of groceries
>>>> emerged as a £1.49 shop. I kid you not.
>>>
>>> I wonder how many tonnes of pennies they get through in a year.
>>
>> Probably no more than all those other shops which sell things for £xx.99
>
>I would have thought a lot more, given that in 2012 only 54% of retail
>sales were paid in cash, while this sort of shop seems to deal
>predominantly or even exclusively in cash.
bought at the supermarket, rather than by what's bought at the £0.99,
£1.99 etc stores.
>> Meanwhile, one of the two lightbulbs I bought for £1.49 on Monday has
>> already failed...
>
>Presumably not LEDs at that price?
--
Roland Perry
Nightjar
Dec 19, 2013, 1:25:05 PM12/19/13
to
off the pump to a parking space alongside the shop and pay, possibly
after doing a bit of shopping, so the technology certainly exists.
Colin Bignell
Adam Funk
Dec 29, 2013, 9:25:27 AM12/29/13
to
On 2013-12-18, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <8eidnfRor4ZndCzP...@giganews.com>, at 18:35:06
> on Wed, 18 Dec 2013, Nightjar <c...@insert.my.surname.here.me.uk>
> remarked:
> In message <8eidnfRor4ZndCzP...@giganews.com>, at 18:35:06
> on Wed, 18 Dec 2013, Nightjar <c...@insert.my.surname.here.me.uk>
> remarked:
>>Presumably not LEDs at that price?
>
> No. If I could find a decently priced R63 LED I'd buy one.
If you find a good, long-lasting R63 substitute, please let me know.
>
> No. If I could find a decently priced R63 LED I'd buy one.
zaax
Dec 29, 2013, 11:15:02 AM12/29/13
to
Fredxxx wrote:
> On 16/12/2013 16:15, Roland Perry wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> I don't think I've ever experienced a pre-pay system in the UK, but
>> perhaps in the very worst areas they may have a few.
>
> I have just once. It was in the early hours where the cashier wouldn't
> allow me to draw fuel and in his worst pigeon English tried to explain
> how he wanted to make a debenture on my card.
>
> His English was so awful that I wasn't certain what he was saying and I
> declined, going onto the next petrol station where all was straight
> forward!
I bet he wasn't on minimum wage - probably a lot less
---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
> On 16/12/2013 16:15, Roland Perry wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> I don't think I've ever experienced a pre-pay system in the UK, but
>> perhaps in the very worst areas they may have a few.
>
> I have just once. It was in the early hours where the cashier wouldn't
> allow me to draw fuel and in his worst pigeon English tried to explain
> how he wanted to make a debenture on my card.
>
> His English was so awful that I wasn't certain what he was saying and I
> declined, going onto the next petrol station where all was straight
> forward!
I bet he wasn't on minimum wage - probably a lot less
---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
0 new messages