I Am Devastated And Outraged
#17
What a nightmare for you. One thing though I'd like to know is if they even did a clearance check? If not why? And if so; what came up as you have a right to know. I start asking some of those questions.
#18
Account Closed




Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 271

Hi Julie
No the contract says nothing about subject to security clearance. I have double checked that. Their letter basically welcomes me to their employ and the contract is pretty bog standard apart from ramming it down my throat about the secrecy act and confidentiality agreement.
Thanks for outlining the possible reasoning behind it. I did think about that earlier this evening. I can see some of the reasons why they would not want to pay out, but this is a huge huge company not a tin pot outfit. I am not sure it would be wise to mention their name on here so i wont for now, but these people have no excuse to have any confusion over it. They are responsible also for the rebuilding of the Military HQ worth billions of GBP and many other corporate interests in UK and abroad.
If they had said at interview my time out of country was an issue, then fair enough, but to tell me i got the job, put me on payroll, let me turn up for work and then pull the rug out form under me is extremely unfair as i have had to make a lot of changes to fit around this job, which has all been a complete waste of time.
I'm being a whinging pom arent i? ....lol ahhh well...
No the contract says nothing about subject to security clearance. I have double checked that. Their letter basically welcomes me to their employ and the contract is pretty bog standard apart from ramming it down my throat about the secrecy act and confidentiality agreement.
Thanks for outlining the possible reasoning behind it. I did think about that earlier this evening. I can see some of the reasons why they would not want to pay out, but this is a huge huge company not a tin pot outfit. I am not sure it would be wise to mention their name on here so i wont for now, but these people have no excuse to have any confusion over it. They are responsible also for the rebuilding of the Military HQ worth billions of GBP and many other corporate interests in UK and abroad.
If they had said at interview my time out of country was an issue, then fair enough, but to tell me i got the job, put me on payroll, let me turn up for work and then pull the rug out form under me is extremely unfair as i have had to make a lot of changes to fit around this job, which has all been a complete waste of time.
I'm being a whinging pom arent i? ....lol ahhh well...

#19
Thread Starter
I don't give a damn









Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 4,980
From: In the arms of my family. Heaven...











I am pretty sure they havent even started a security check because i got taken into the checking office on my first day and the lady said she was going to hold my clearance forms until they got a decision on the rules first.
I will get my firend who is a manager in there to see what she can find out on Monday.
#20










Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 23,400











Hi Julie
No the contract says nothing about subject to security clearance. I have double checked that. Their letter basically welcomes me to their employ and the contract is pretty bog standard apart from ramming it down my throat about the secrecy act and confidentiality agreement.
Thanks for outlining the possible reasoning behind it. I did think about that earlier this evening. I can see some of the reasons why they would not want to pay out, but this is a huge huge company not a tin pot outfit. I am not sure it would be wise to mention their name on here so i wont for now, but these people have no excuse to have any confusion over it. They are responsible also for the rebuilding of the Military HQ worth billions of GBP and many other corporate interests in UK and abroad.
If they had said at interview my time out of country was an issue, then fair enough, but to tell me i got the job, put me on payroll, let me turn up for work and then pull the rug out form under me is extremely unfair as i have had to make a lot of changes to fit around this job, which has all been a complete waste of time.
I'm being a whinging pom arent i? ....lol ahhh well...
No the contract says nothing about subject to security clearance. I have double checked that. Their letter basically welcomes me to their employ and the contract is pretty bog standard apart from ramming it down my throat about the secrecy act and confidentiality agreement.
Thanks for outlining the possible reasoning behind it. I did think about that earlier this evening. I can see some of the reasons why they would not want to pay out, but this is a huge huge company not a tin pot outfit. I am not sure it would be wise to mention their name on here so i wont for now, but these people have no excuse to have any confusion over it. They are responsible also for the rebuilding of the Military HQ worth billions of GBP and many other corporate interests in UK and abroad.
If they had said at interview my time out of country was an issue, then fair enough, but to tell me i got the job, put me on payroll, let me turn up for work and then pull the rug out form under me is extremely unfair as i have had to make a lot of changes to fit around this job, which has all been a complete waste of time.
I'm being a whinging pom arent i? ....lol ahhh well...

I think you should at least take legal advice on this on what to do next and if there are grounds to take this further.
Personally I dont think CAB are specialised enough either and agree that it would be worth seeing a solicitor just this once, and doing research as to which would be the best solicitor - check test cases and/or research for similar and who represented them.
At the very least you should get some answers if not a bit of compensation for your inconvenience. At best - well who knows because from what you have said, they are so in the wrong that they would have some serious arse licking to get on the right side of employment law.
But please dont give up, because I have a feeling on this as I am sure will many others, you are not only in the right, but you would win.
Some organisations just hope that the 'little people' will go away with a formal letter and some brainwashing claptrap.
You are too smart and an intelligent woman to let that happen. Grab them by the nuts and take them to court.
#21
Account Closed




Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 271

Yes, it is a huge nightmare as my kiwi husband is stuck in Sydney until he gets his spouse visa to enter UK, and i have to show that i have enough earnings to support him until he gets a job.
I am pretty sure they havent even started a security check because i got taken into the checking office on my first day and the lady said she was going to hold my clearance forms until they got a decision on the rules first.
I will get my firend who is a manager in there to see what she can find out on Monday.
I am pretty sure they havent even started a security check because i got taken into the checking office on my first day and the lady said she was going to hold my clearance forms until they got a decision on the rules first.
I will get my firend who is a manager in there to see what she can find out on Monday.
#22
Account Closed








Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 3,533

I'm no legal boffin, but I would be looking at taking this further as it sounds like a case of breach of contract to me.
I'm so sorry this has all fallen through for you as you were so looking forward to this job. I really hope something comes along quickly just as good.
I'm so sorry this has all fallen through for you as you were so looking forward to this job. I really hope something comes along quickly just as good.
#23
Forum Regular



Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 108




If you can't get legal aid (quite likely as legal aid cases have to pass a 'legal merit' test) and then lose the case (again quite likely) you will be on the hook for the other side's doubtless astronomical costs.
It sucks and you have my sympathy but my advice is to put it behind you and move on.
#25
Home and Happy










Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 94,305
From: Keep true friends and puppets close, trust no-one else...












In my experience with the police in the UK and the govt over here (Aus), it has to say in the letter and contract that the offer is subject to the relevant police and security checks. They will often start staff before security checks are completed, especially if they have to check with agencies abroad, hence they need a coverall in the offer, so that if info comes back making the person unsatisfactory for the job, they can be asked to leave. Same as referees - if they haven't done reference checks prior to starting you in as job, they can make an offer "subject to the referee reports". When the CRB was brought in there were a lot of agencies having to offer jobs "subject to satisfatory CRB checks" because of the horrendous delays, and they had to cover themselves by stating it clearly in the job offer.
As it's the MOD you're dealing with, you need some seriously good legal advice, preferably from someone who has dealt with that type of contract before - defence and security. Motley Fool would be a good place to try and track down such a lawyer.
Good luck - I really feel for you.
#26
Cynically amused.








Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 3,648
From: BC











The residency requirement has always been there for jobs with the MOD and some other government departments. Specifically for the MOD, you cannot get DVA clearance without a minimum of three, usually five years prior residence. Some jobs require up to ten years residence in the UK prior to appointment. Unfortunately, the private company screwed up, and I doubt you will have any recourse.
#27
BE Forum Addict






Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,706
From: Back home :)











Hi Flea
What a nightmare mate. Cant believe you were treated like that. Hope you're going to consult a lawyer. You must be so mad after thinking you were sorted, job ready to go to, one you liked too and on the way to getting your hubby over too.
Knobbies!
take care
Tanya
What a nightmare mate. Cant believe you were treated like that. Hope you're going to consult a lawyer. You must be so mad after thinking you were sorted, job ready to go to, one you liked too and on the way to getting your hubby over too.
Knobbies!
take care
Tanya
#28
Having worked in personnel within MOD prior to moving to Oz, all jobs I know of are subject to security checks, however we would sometimes take people on short term contracts until their checks came through with it being stated that should the checks show something up, then the job offer was withdrawn. Did the job description state it was a reserved post ??(this roughly means it is not open to non British citizens and has residency implication too). Personally I would contact MOD Main Building in London and ask to speak to someone about the employment rules & policy as the way you have been treated I would say that someone has not followed proper procedures and you may not have been informed of the full processes.
Last edited by gobbyjock; Sep 29th 2007 at 1:30 am.
#29
The residency requirement has always been there for jobs with the MOD and some other government departments. Specifically for the MOD, you cannot get DVA clearance without a minimum of three, usually five years prior residence. Some jobs require up to ten years residence in the UK prior to appointment. Unfortunately, the private company screwed up, and I doubt you will have any recourse.
#30
Hi Julie
No the contract says nothing about subject to security clearance. I have double checked that. Their letter basically welcomes me to their employ and the contract is pretty bog standard apart from ramming it down my throat about the secrecy act and confidentiality agreement.
Thanks for outlining the possible reasoning behind it. I did think about that earlier this evening. I can see some of the reasons why they would not want to pay out, but this is a huge huge company not a tin pot outfit. I am not sure it would be wise to mention their name on here so i wont for now, but these people have no excuse to have any confusion over it. They are responsible also for the rebuilding of the Military HQ worth billions of GBP and many other corporate interests in UK and abroad.
If they had said at interview my time out of country was an issue, then fair enough, but to tell me i got the job, put me on payroll, let me turn up for work and then pull the rug out form under me is extremely unfair as i have had to make a lot of changes to fit around this job, which has all been a complete waste of time.
No the contract says nothing about subject to security clearance. I have double checked that. Their letter basically welcomes me to their employ and the contract is pretty bog standard apart from ramming it down my throat about the secrecy act and confidentiality agreement.
Thanks for outlining the possible reasoning behind it. I did think about that earlier this evening. I can see some of the reasons why they would not want to pay out, but this is a huge huge company not a tin pot outfit. I am not sure it would be wise to mention their name on here so i wont for now, but these people have no excuse to have any confusion over it. They are responsible also for the rebuilding of the Military HQ worth billions of GBP and many other corporate interests in UK and abroad.
If they had said at interview my time out of country was an issue, then fair enough, but to tell me i got the job, put me on payroll, let me turn up for work and then pull the rug out form under me is extremely unfair as i have had to make a lot of changes to fit around this job, which has all been a complete waste of time.
For lower level clearances they often like to do a credit check and this can cause issues for those newly resident in the United Kingdom (or returned to the U.K.)
In some cases there is a work-around this by completing a financial questionnaire:
http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/Ab...nalFinance.htm



