Just to back up ericsbrother's point, it is all informal at this point. Take someone with you to the investigatory meeting and see how you get on. It could all blow over very quickly and informally.

Thank you steampowered and becky2585 for the time you have taken over my query. It is most helpful to me. I shall bear it all in mind, it will help me at my hearing. Thank you. I have been reading about some other claimants who have been caught by costs. In some cases the employer's side seem to have used really underhand tactics. I suppose employers who are regularly taken to a tribunal get to know all the tricks and what they can get away with? I shall concentrate on my legal points.

Thanks again steampowered. I am new to all this but I'm beginning to see it is a bit loaded towards my employer. I tried to resolve this through their internal grievance process. I have made a number of overtures since then to resolve things before going to an ET hearing. My employer has ignored nearly all those efforts. I did receive one email reply where they suggested a small figure to put things to bed, however when I responded positively to this they never came back to me. Quote from earlier - "The legal system has a very deliberate policy of not looking at anything which forms part of the general matrix of settlement discussions" I am surprised that I cannot mention this behaviour at the hearing. I have tried to keep costs to a minimum and resolve the issue, my employer ignored those efforts and is still running up the costs. From what you are saying, I cannot point out this behaviour to the panel, even though I have tried to sort out a settlement and my employer ignored those efforts... and potentially I can get stuck with the costs that my employer has deliberately run up? Sorry if I seem to be going around in circles - I just need clarity - am I allowed to discuss costs at all during the hearing itself?

Hi, when you get back to work it may be worth seeing if your employer has a set of written grievance procedures you can reference. I would imagine that everything is still a bit 'informal' right now, so there should be decent lines of communications, is there no-one you can ask at work about the specifics - HR perhaps? From what I have read you seem to have a young, badly behaved pillock on your hands. He has to do more than throw a strop and accuse; he had to back up any complaint. Management usually stick together anyway. If you both have to hug and make up in the end try not to strangle him at the same time.

Thank you very much again steampowered. 'there is now law against being a git' helped raise a smile - I will try to remember that. Funnily enough I was sent an email this morning with a pdf attachment of a formal letter (which is in the post?) informing me that my employers will ask for costs if I do not stop my claim. I've also had a read about 'without prejudice' following your advice above. From what I understand it has to be mentioned in the document it refers to. I have had several intense repeat reads of the pdf and the email and they don't mention the 'WP' words anywhere. Have they slipped up? That being the case can I mention the letter in my hearing? Although I may only have a little time in the hearing I would wish to briefly raise the costs issue. Whether the panel pay any attention is another matter. Procedurally am I allowed to bring up this issue during the hearing? Or am I not allowed?

Hi, I'm not sure I'm qualified to give an opinion, but I wouldn't let it ruin your holiday. Relax and enjoy the time off. It is only an investigatory meeting, to explore the issues raised. I've been through a few of these as an 'underling'. Even if it moves forward from there there should be an informal stage to try to resolve matters. Your manager may have spoken to your subordinate and this may be the knee-jerk result of that. Nothing may come of it. If you are in a managerial position you should be just fine. That is my experience.

Hello, thanks again for your advice. I've done some follow-up reading on costs - it all seems a bit unclear - but I assume it only becomes a 'live' issue if I lose my claim. But I want to do everything to avert any such threat (as per my employers 'warning' on costs). If you would indulge me further I would like to ask a procedural question please? I want to complain to the hearing about the costs pressure my employers are using - as a further example of their bad behaviour. My (law student) helper has had a brief read around the subject and tells me that she thinks (but she is not sure) that a claimant cannot raise the issue of costs during the hearing, it looks as though it is usually dealt with (if necessary) only after the hearing has finished and when a judgement is made (at the end of the hearing). Could someone please tell me if it is correct for us to assume that (procedurally) it is important that the tribunal panel overseeing the hearing should not know, during or before the hearing, that a 'costs warning' has been issued by the employer, especially before the panel reach their decision on the claim? i.e. would it be seen as influencing their decision and therefore annoy the panel? I hope that reads OK, we are both confused on this point. It would be good to know what I can and cannot say in the hearing - I don't want to cheese off the panel by making any unnecessary mistakes.

Thank you for a comprehensive answer again steampowered. Yes I may be getting distracted by the costs issue. My employer (public sector) has a small legal team and I know that they aren't that well remunerated. If they submit a hourly cost of 130 pounds per hour for someone only costing 25/30 pounds per hour will I be able to raise this issue with the tribunal if it all goes wonky for me at the hearing?

Thanks you for the advice, I notice from the link steampowered supplied that section 78 (2) also refers to the 33 pound per hour limit. It is good to know I could claim something for the help I have been given. Ta for that. Yes sidewinder I do feel things are looking a bit lopsided. I hadn't thought of costs until recently, I thought each side had to meet their own costs. Then the other side verbally warned me (in an 'informal' chat with no witnesses on my side, of course) that they will 'max' out their figures on their hourly rate and hours claimed (if I go ahead to a hearing) and hit me with a large legal cost. How can I stop them doing this? Are they held to a 33 pound limit as well? They said they can submit any figure they want, the tribunal won't know any different. Who checks their figures? It would be helpful to know. Thanks.

I am going through an ET claim. As part of the process I have to list the amount of costs I have incurred. I am told I can list up to around 120 pounds per hour for the work done. Most of the advice work has been done by a law student who is a friend of my sister. She has probably done about 20 hours work so far and says she is OK about doing it for next to nothing. However if I win my case and get costs awarded I would like to reward her for her work. Is it OK if I submit a claim for say 50 hours work at say 100 pounds per hour? Are those figures reasonable - it is legal advice after all? I can't find any advice that says I can't do this - but I thought I would ask posters their advice on here. Can the other side challenge these costs? Would it get me in trouble with the tribunal? Thinking about it - if I can do this will the other side be doing the same thing with their costs calculations? If I lose how could I challenge an 'inflated' set of figures? Thanks