In 2016 we were writing to Kier and their lawyers (now Highways England’s lawyers) asking why drivers, fleets, hauliers (Third-Parties) or their insurers were subject to uplifts, multipliers:
- 1.5x uplift after 5pm of a weekday
- 2x uplift of a weekend
These uplifts were on the already exaggerated rates for an AIW of £73.05/hour to a Third-Party, charged to Highways England at £23.71/hour (plus an uplift <8%).
Shakespeare Martineau LLP
1 Colmore Square
Fax: 0121 2373011
Your Ref: Kier Ref: GC/020015
Our Ref: T01A049
Loss date: 29/05/2015 – damage to Crown Property
Claim value: £11,173.41
We are instructed in respect of the above matter by [redacted].
Quantum is not currently agreed which is disappointing as, on 04/03/2014 Natalie Robinson of KHL emailed “Looking into this for you!”; this was a matter that, whilst HE had apparently been advised to the contrary, was still charged using 1153 in 02/2016. The fee than dropped from about £11,000 to abut £5,500 i.e. there had been a 100% mark-up. In brief HE:
- Appear to have been misled that all claims had been re-priced
- Missed the obvious overcharging on most / all (?) sub threshold claims and
- Misunderstood or were misled about the involvement of an Audi private motor car:
Whilst HE appeared to have concluded that our concern about an Audi A4 S Line Black Edition Tdi being linked to a claim was an MID issue, the vehicle appears as an AIW’s transport:
The above vehicle DF63DFG is a silver Adi 4 door saloon and we still wish to know
- why was it used an charged as an AIW vehicle.
Please also shed some light upon the attendance of the AIW’s at 2:50am. We are being advised that AIW’s work days, that their shifts do not cover nights (source – Ms Granville). Admittedly, Ms Granville has provided a number of accounts about AIW shifts and her staff other descriptions of their hours. However, on 27/02/2016 in a phone conversation Ms Granville advised that, AIW’s work 8am to 5pm, Monday to Friday; that’s their core hours. If, as an example, a n incident occurred at 9 o’clock at night KHL would have to call them the AIW out from home, they would have nobody on. There would be general team crews who are out working, there would be people on the network at night, but not the emergency response. At 9 o’clock that would involve a callout.
We are being told that as a callout is necessary between 8am and 5pm (this later changed to 7am and 6pm), a ‘multiplier’ is applied.
We understand ‘overtime’; it is paid ‘over’ and above the normal working hours. However, we believe that AIW’s work 24/7 that is to say that they are employed to work shifts, it is in their contract (the extract was to be provided but has been withheld). If so:
- Why would an AIW be paid ‘overtime’ to attend during his working hours?
- Is it the case that the AIW is not paid an more, but that the increase is applied by KHL to inflate the rate, to obtain greater remuneration; the money goes to KHL; not the staff member?
If so, why are KHL attempting to convince us otherwise? How is this conduct anything short of seeking to gain by dishonestly making a false representation?
Returning to this matter, there were 2 attending AIW’s [redacted] and [redacted] the ‘timings’ are:
- Contacted 02:34 email
- Attended 02:50
- Departed 03:15
It appears both AIW’s were, at almost 3am, contacted by email. I suspect this is because they were on duty, working from a depot. In support of this is that they attended the location within 16 minutes; 2 AIW’s both contacted and able to arrive promptly, synchronised.
The location when contacted is not present either it was not completed or it has been removed. Please advise which.
If, as appears to be the case, AIW;s work 24/7, it does not appear the account we are being supplied that they are working overtime is correct. We understand overtime for working beyond a shift (more than 9 hours), being called out to an incident or being asked to work when otherwise on a rest day. However, it appears KHL nominate hours as ‘core’ irrespective of staff working different hours and if so:
- The misrepresentation must stop
- The multipliers need to be removed
It appears multipliers are being used to increase invoicing, as a mechanism to ensure the loss resulting from abandoning 1153 is reduced.
Please explain why Highways England are not charged multipliers, why these are reserved for drivers, fleets and insurers.