|
|
Post by highwayman on May 11, 2006 21:25:36 GMT 1
Hereticus: I have only had 1 claim in about 11 years working for Hillarys. I had asked customer to clear items off a shelf which was adjacent to the window in the bathroom. Customer declined and said, "Don't worry there's nothing of any value on there". A few minutes later I happened to catch the shelf with my elbow as it was right up to the edge of the window. The shelf vibrated and a glass bottle of smellys bounced off into the bath putting a nice 1" diameter hole into the very old fibreglass bath. Customer got the bath replaced. So it's not just the no value item but also consider the knock on effect.
Anyway had a really good one today.
Went to a flash new office block and customer wanted 2m x 2m wood ven fitting over the reception desk? Wanted it fitting to the suspended ceiling (Polystyrene tiles etc.). Took one look at it, (Checked on SAM (NOT) for available bracket types but couldn't find Sky Hooks) and was out of there as quick as my legs would carry me.
Would you risk the £250 claim???
|
|
|
|
Post by greenpesto on May 11, 2006 21:29:05 GMT 1
Hereticus: I have only had 1 claim in about 11 years working for Hillarys. I had asked customer to clear items off a shelf which was adjacent to the window in the bathroom. Customer declined and said, "Don't worry there's nothing of any value on there". A few minutes later I happened to catch the shelf with my elbow as it was right up to the edge of the window. The shelf vibrated and a glass bottle of smellys bounced off into the bath putting a nice 1" diameter hole into the very old fibreglass bath. Customer got the bath replaced. So it's not just the no value item but also consider the knock on effect. ......................................................................................................................... Shouldn't that be 'knocked off' effect?!!!!!! |
|
|
|
Post by highwayman on May 11, 2006 21:29:15 GMT 1
Joy: I think that is the best idea. We should all return the very letter stating that we do not agree to these new proposals. If everyone did that they would have to rethink it!
|
|
|
|
Post by BlindWizard on May 11, 2006 21:48:40 GMT 1
I think we should all write/email John Risman.
1. Making your comments about the insurance issue
2. List all the other items with your comments and request clarification.
3. Summarise how you feel the benefits to Advisors / Hillarys compare and how you feel the issues discussed at the January meetings have been resolved or not.
If you wanted to you could also comment at the end about how in general you feel the company/management are doing regarding service levels, company branding and how you think our customers regard us now.
If enough advisors do that within the next week surely they must sit-up and listen.
Post on this site that you've sent the letter or even copy the letter to encourage more to do the same.
Striking is no good for either us or the company, we have to explain how we feel and show it is a large majority that are unhappy.
I've noticed a number of new advisors joining today and also posts from people who haven't posted before. This demonstrates it's not just the more vocal few who are unhappy.
|
|
|
|
Post by mendipmagpie on May 11, 2006 22:00:55 GMT 1
I have to agree with most of what has been written by others and feel strongly that all changes must be put into print and signed by the proper authority.
My FSM has his moments but on the whole I think is pretty upfront even when I disagree, but things generaly get sorted. However I think it was a total cop-out by the HILLARYS TEAM to expect them to work from a crib sheet. I personally could not repeat his responses verbatem so would need a written response as a record. Unfortunately this does not appear to be available at this point.
Like others I have only had one claim in eleven years and that was last week when the paint on a conservatory cill came off with the tape. Guess what the cost was ,right £250.
It would be easy to get sidetracked during the discussion on the latest letter and if you fail to raise a particular point then it would be read that you accepted it all.
I think not.
MM
|
|
|
|
Post by pyramid on May 11, 2006 22:09:11 GMT 1
'A verbal contract is not worth the paper it is printed on'
Samuel Goldwyn
A quick searh for verbal contracts on google came up with a American legal website and verbal contracts must not be acknowledged or they become active. Also they must not involve
sums of money over fixed amounts.
Does anybody know the English intrpretation?
I'll be writing to this effect and asking what Hillary's lawyers have to say. Seems to me they are winging it on this one and we need to call their bluff.
|
|
|
|
Post by russell on May 11, 2006 22:15:38 GMT 1
im depressed so im off need a good nights sleep to prepare me for tomorrows
late delivery
missing invoices
missing items
damaged items
irate customers {see above }
riseing fuel costs
etc etc etc
just a normal day really please tell me its not fri 13th as i cant afford £250
|
|
*Star*man*
Full Member
Advisor with some experience - UK
Posts: 171
|
Post by *Star*man* on May 11, 2006 22:24:35 GMT 1
Have read and re-read the posts on this issue .
The main point i am interested in is HOW will Hillarys take this money from an agent who has the mis-fortune to have such an 'accident' and then be held liable ?
Farmer said this .....Also on a legal issue, can Hillarys take the £250 out of the commission before they give it to you. Or should they bill us for it separately. would it be a good idea to seek legal advice on this matter.
If they reclaim this money direct from agents commission , then i think this is really Bad News. Imagine you just made enough commission in that month to pay your morgage etc, then suddenly see a Minus £250 ! That is well out of order.
We MUST ensure these deductions are SEPERATED from our earnings ... Back me up on this you guys?
|
|
|
|
Post by lesroman on May 11, 2006 22:44:44 GMT 1
Typed this once but seems to have got lost. just back from holdiay spent last hr or so reading through posts. All points raised cant be argued with but would like to add another that seems to have been missed. We have all from time to time had customers who after fitting and paying, their payment method does not clear, has a result we have been paid the commission and then weeks months later we get it clawed back because finally debt recovery stop trying. Under new method this wont happen because we wont be paid until full balance is paid. Nothing wrong in this really just delays but does mean claw back probs disappear, however I'll state one case.
fitted wood blinds approx 8 months ago in pub that was having a total refit. £4500 order nice commission. Fit and then info Hillarys so they can get shop fitting company to pay up, but said company dosent. Hillarys have now stopped chasing, the blinds belong to the Pub so I cant go and take down and because i Represent Hillarys i am not legally entitled to try to claim for by loss of earnings.
Point is if i cant claim and Hillarys wont, then they should pay me (us) for this type of problem. I have spoken to my FSM and Ross who both see the logic but cant move this forward.
Another case of Advisors hands tied.
And before anyone points out,... yes I know that the costs of taking mrs Jones to court for payment of £30 commission is self defeating but it really irks me
|
|
|
|
Post by Blind Scout on May 11, 2006 23:43:26 GMT 1
A thought for those who employ fitters. You as the agent, will be responsible for damage done by the fitter, so you will need to build that into your contract with them. Of course the fitters will probably tell you to shove it where the sun don't shine.
|
|
|
|
Post by RED on May 11, 2006 23:55:10 GMT 1
A thought for those who employ fitters. You as the agent, will be responsible for damage done by the fitter, so you will need to build that into your contract with them. Of course the fitters will probably tell you to shove it where the sun don't shine. Mine already has. So now I will be held responsible for anything he does. All I want to do is earn a decent living for me and my family. Totally unfair world we live in motivated by money and greed. Red |
|
|
|
Post by Blind Scout on May 12, 2006 0:56:37 GMT 1
Have read and re-read the posts on this issue . The main point i am interested in is HOW will Hillarys take this money from an agent who has the mis-fortune to have such an 'accident' and then be held liable ? Farmer said this .....Also on a legal issue, can Hillarys take the £250 out of the commission before they give it to you. Or should they bill us for it separately. would it be a good idea to seek legal advice on this matter. If they reclaim this money direct from agents commission , then i think this is really Bad News. Imagine you just made enough commission in that month to pay your morgage etc, then suddenly see a Minus £250 ! That is well out of order. We MUST ensure these deductions are SEPERATED from our earnings ... Back me up on this you guys? Dug outr my Business Law books again, "The law of agency". Under Reimbursement of expenses and relief it says "The principle must also relieve his agents of any liability which he incurs, while properly carying out his duties". That would indicate to me that Hillarys are responsible for any damages. However, under The duties of the agent owed to his principle it says "An agent must excercise due skill and care in performing his tasks... If an agent fails to take care and his principle suffers loss, he could be sued for damages for negligence". So Hillary's cannot just help themselves to your commission, they would have to prove negligence and obtain damages, possible through the courts. |
|
|
|
Post by Blind Scout on May 12, 2006 1:08:28 GMT 1
... however I'll state one case. fitted wood blinds approx 8 months ago in pub that was having a total refit. £4500 order nice commission. Fit and then info Hillarys so they can get shop fitting company to pay up, but said company dosent. Hillarys have now stopped chasing, the blinds belong to the Pub so I cant go and take down and because i Represent Hillarys i am not legally entitled to try to claim for by loss of earnings. Point is if i cant claim and Hillarys wont, then they should pay me (us) for this type of problem. I have spoken to my FSM and Ross who both see the logic but cant move this forward. Under "The law of agency" and Re-numeration, "An agent who has carried outhis duties in accordance with the terms of his agreement with his principle will become entitled to payment. He is entitled to be paid even if the contract causes the principle a loss or if it is not carried out through the fault of either the principle or the third party". You could always try the small claims procedure to recover your commission, or accept it like the rest of us, that we are being screwed. |
|
hardman
New Member
ADVISOR
Posts: 16
|
Post by hardman on May 12, 2006 1:28:48 GMT 1
Firstly I would sincerely like to thank Hereticus et al for the professional and valiant efforts at the Forums. I now however start to think that the more pessimistic posts were probably right!
The first memo was a joke full of schoolboy errors and ambiguity.
The clarification "introduce changes that will reward good Advisor business practice"
I've had that translated by my FSM to "MEANS YOU DON'T GET PENALISED"
They can't confirm CLARIFICATION in writing - B"LL"CKS, they tried that once - clear as mud!!
I said I didn't accept the changes but guess that Hillarys can do what they want?? "YES and if you don't like it you know what you can do!! The majority welcome the changes" So it's just me again or is he a BL**DY LIAR???
I'm so p"ss"d off -call a strike - withhold deposits - WALK AWAY -whatever the action COUNT ME IN!!
|
|
|
|
Post by greenpesto on May 12, 2006 8:59:20 GMT 1
There is a web-site called 'Babel' that translates one language to another for you!!!
If there was one that could translate 'Hillarys spin' into 'English' you will find all translations come back as - 'You're all 'Fuck3d Lads & we don't give a 'Toss'!!!!!
|
|
