Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Paragraph 18 – you are still talking about Boston stolen items. About time this was fixed??? Paragraph 19  In any event, the claimant's PS5 gaming device was correctly declared and correctly valued. The defendant accepted it for carriage and was even prepared to earn extra money by selling sell insurance in case of its loss or damage. New paragraph 20 – this the defendant routinely sells insurance in respect of "no compensation" items (a secondary contract contrary to section 72 CRA 2015) new paragraph above paragraph 20 – the defendant purports to limit its liability in respect of lost or damaged items. This is contrary to section 57 of the consumer rights act 2015. The defendant offers to extend their liability if their customer purchases an insurance cover for an extra sum of money. This insurance is a secondary contract calculated to exclude or limit their liability for the defendants contractual breaches and is contrary to section 72 of the consumer rights act 2015. New paragraph below paragraph 42 – the defendant merely relies on "standard industry practice" You haven't pointed to the place in your bundle of the Telegraph newspaper extract. You have to jiggle the paragraphs around. Even though I have suggested new paragraph numbers, the order I have suggested is on your existing version 5. You will have to work it out for your next version. Good luck!   Let's see version 6 Separately, would you be kind enough to send me an unredacted to me at our admin email address.
    • i think theres been MORE than amble evidence of that and am astonished that criminal proceedings haven't begun.
    • Yep, those 'requirements' not met to shareholders satisfaction seem to me to be: 1. Not being allowed to increase customer bills by 40% (of which well over 50% of the new total would NOT be investment) 2. 1 plus regulators not agreeing to letting them do 'things in their own time (ie carry on regardless)
    • As already mentioned freely available "credit scores" are fairly useless. All lenders have their own "credit scoring" system, that for obvious reasons they don't divulge. And they're "scored" differently to the freely available ones. As soon as they could, we've always encouraged our two children to use credit cards responsibly... Pay off in full, etc, to generate good history. It's paid off. At quite young ages, they have both obtained loans for cars, mortgage and their credit card limits are through the roof. Personally, I have shifted debt around a lot on credit cards (even financed a house purchase once at 0% 😉) and I've only ever been refused a credit card once, sorry twice by the same company, over many years. They must have something very different in their lending criteria. You're a tight one, Mr Branson.
    • Hi DX - quick question, what is the bank likely to do when they get my letter of change of address ? also what is the worst they can do? thanks J1L
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 160 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Using a Comparator in a disability discrimination case


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4784 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

I have a thread about my current Employment Tribunal already but am concious that using just that one thread will make it more difficult for people searching for advice on similar issues.

 

I want to use a 'Comparator' to show I have been treated less favourably. The concern I have is that I don't have detailed information about the comparators or any proof to back up my argument - just what I know. Will an Employment Tribunal expect me to be able to provide proof? How can I obtain the information? For example, one element I know is that;

 

  • I work with vulnerable people in their own homes, providing generic support and advice;

 

  • The comparator works with vulnerable people in their own homes, providing specific support and advice.

Settled Tribunal claim against employer regarding Disability Discrimination.

Recovered my money from an AXA Bonus Cash Builder Plus after discovering here on CAG that the original advertising was found to be misleading.

Cabot still can't provide a copy of Credit Agreement and have left me alone for about a year now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A comparator does not have to be a real person! The test is whether a hypthetical person without a disability, in the exact same circumstances, would be treated in the same way. This is because, in many circumstances, there would not be a real comparator. The most apposite case law is Child Support Agency v. Truman ( if I recall correctly it was 2009), but this also links to the Malcolm case (Lewisham v. Malcolm) because the terms of the DDA relating to housing and to employment are the same. If you can point to a specific circumstance where somebody else who is not disabled in exactly the same circumstances as you has been treated differently, then you can do so, but it may get murky if you get bogged down with arguments about how John Doe isn't like you, rather than whether it was discrimination or not! The whole point of claiming disability discrimination is that you are alleging that you have been traeetd less favourably that someone without a disability - the tribunal will judge the claim on this basis whether or not there is a real comparator.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for clarifying that for me SarEl. I'll have a read of that case law later today. My employers policy sets out what action should be taken when someone makes a request for home-working (which I did). This policy and the assessment procedure was completely ignored in my case and they instructed a private detective to spy on me (funnily enough, not in the policy). The comparator I had in mind is a real person but they were working from home from the beginning of their contract (several existing contracts won by current employer and merged into one team) so I'm not sure that helps me?

Settled Tribunal claim against employer regarding Disability Discrimination.

Recovered my money from an AXA Bonus Cash Builder Plus after discovering here on CAG that the original advertising was found to be misleading.

Cabot still can't provide a copy of Credit Agreement and have left me alone for about a year now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Possibly, but it also may not because the the "same circumstances" thing - I don't know what their circumstances are. For example, they may have negotiated this as part of their recruitment. They may have an elderly dependant relative. And unless you know their circumstances, you are treading on dicey ground relying on this. I would recommend the route of persuing the "unfair application of the policy", let the tribunal consider that against the "fictional comparator", but make sure you mention that others have permission for home-working - in other words, let the tribunal chase that if they feel it relevant. Tribunals aren't stupid - they have to apply the law, but they can also see through attempts to pervert it. The comparator arguments are filled with flaws - as you will see when you look at the relevant cases. So in your shoes I wouldn't want to get too bogged down in that if you have a clear case of them not following their policy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you SarEl. I can relate to what you said about letting the tribunal chase it if they feel it is relevant. For my PHR I had prepared arguments about 'Deduced Effects' and weight of evidence but the judge did it for me before I got the chance. The Respondents solicitor tried to capitalise on my lack of experience a couple of times and although I could see this and feel I could have responded, the judge again did it for me.

 

I haven't had time yet to look at that case law but still will. The people I had looked at as comparators all worked from home because this was how the contract was run before they were transferred to this employer under TUPE.

 

There are at least two of their policies that they did not follow which is much easier to evidence.

 

I will of course mention that other people already work from home. On the ET3 they stated that I could not work from home due to data protection issues regarding client's files. I was surprised to see this as there are already several people working from home and keeping their client files there. I have worked from home in the past so know it is possible as long as data is kept confidential and in a secure, lockable unit.

Settled Tribunal claim against employer regarding Disability Discrimination.

Recovered my money from an AXA Bonus Cash Builder Plus after discovering here on CAG that the original advertising was found to be misleading.

Cabot still can't provide a copy of Credit Agreement and have left me alone for about a year now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't had time yet to look at that case law but still will. The people I had looked at as comparators all worked from home because this was how the contract was run before they were transferred to this employer under TUPE.

 

And therein lies the snake in the garden - they are not comparators because their terms and conditions are protected by TUPE and yours aren't! So the circumstances are not the same. Stick to what I told you - concentrate on your main points and use these as "hares". If the dogs run that is their business.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And therein lies the snake in the garden - they are not comparators because their terms and conditions are protected by TUPE and yours aren't! So the circumstances are not the same. Stick to what I told you - concentrate on your main points and use these as "hares". If the dogs run that is their business.

 

I have just read a summary of the case-law you mentioned. It's clear now that I can't use the existing homeworkers as a 'comparator' but it does at least prove that home working is possible. Additionally, as you pointed out - the failure to follow their policy is more relevant. They have a 'home-working' policy and it's even cross referenced in their 'Equal Opportunities' policy.

 

I didn't want to start yet another thread so hopefully this will be ok here: They have said that someone has 'left' their employ as a result of the way I was treated. I was never told this and only found out as it was in the ET3. There are no details of who this was and on what grounds and I feel this information is likely to be beneficial to my case. What would be the best way of obtaining this information?

 

I have a sneaking suspicion that it may have been over the instruction of a private detective to spy on me and if this is the case, surely there are implications as they have since decided to use it as evidence?

Settled Tribunal claim against employer regarding Disability Discrimination.

Recovered my money from an AXA Bonus Cash Builder Plus after discovering here on CAG that the original advertising was found to be misleading.

Cabot still can't provide a copy of Credit Agreement and have left me alone for about a year now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You're right of course, I didn't consider the confidentiality aspect. They say this person has left their employ as a result of the way I was treated so I assume they were using this in their defence - despite claiming not to have done anything wrong.

Settled Tribunal claim against employer regarding Disability Discrimination.

Recovered my money from an AXA Bonus Cash Builder Plus after discovering here on CAG that the original advertising was found to be misleading.

Cabot still can't provide a copy of Credit Agreement and have left me alone for about a year now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes - but it is hardly in their favour, is it? But I think you are chasing herrings again. You can cross -examine if they raise this at tribunal, but I can hardly see what it has to do with anything. After all, assume for one minute that the employer is right in what they did, and someone left as a result of not agreeing with them. It doesn't make them less right, does it? So what does this actually mean - it means someone left and that's all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you SarEl. I understand what you're saying and it's really helpful to have some perspective on these smaller issues. They are 'niggles' which I need to put to bed to be able to better focus on the more important points.

Settled Tribunal claim against employer regarding Disability Discrimination.

Recovered my money from an AXA Bonus Cash Builder Plus after discovering here on CAG that the original advertising was found to be misleading.

Cabot still can't provide a copy of Credit Agreement and have left me alone for about a year now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...