Thank you dx100uk & Stu007 I truly appreciate your knowledge and time to tell me it. It might help if there is a way of convincing the employers to take steps, which is a possibility, but I am not going to hold my breath on that on one. At least I can tell my son that the police needed the company to do it, which should really have been explained to him by the police man. He may feel less resentful of the system.

No, I just think they couldn't be arsed with a small thing like this. Bigger fish to fry and all that...

Whilst I appreciate that pcs can be selected to remember passwords, it's not my son's first rodeo so to speak, he very pc literate. He knows never to save passwords on others if accessing. He also didn't email this to the works pc, it was in his personal Gmail account, of which was accessed from the works pc on a day he was not in. That is not to say that the manager couldn't have looked at the CCTV footage of which is on them all the time, and seen him type his password in. As for contract, not sure if that is in his employment contract, I understand there are company policies and procedures that have to be signed, my son was never given it, and so never signed it. I know this because the first investigation, one of the gripes was that he was on his laptop, which his previous manager had given him express permission to do, as being 12 hours in a small room with no one else without the ability to leave and have proper breaks, was like torture. But the then acting manager/now manager said he couldn't do anything about it because he hadn't signed it. I understand they still hadn't afterwards but my son compromised with them on that anyway, he didn't want to upset the client. (By the way having a source of entertainment is standard in other organisations, even the BOE of which my son worked for nearly 4 years). Anyway, it's a hopeless case, because as you say, there is always something they can claim. But thanks for your input.

I agree but that was their protocol, if evidence of something was needed to be recorded they would use their own phone camera/film and email to download it to the works computer.

Yes, he could prove it, he found the evidence of emails opened and time stamps in the cache. The written logs told him who it was in the room. He screen shotted and took photos on his phone also. The screen shots were placed on the work computer of which he would tell them where when investigation began. The police were contacted, and he made his statement. The police officer later came back and told him he had not investigated as deemed a civil matter, therefore the CCTV which would have shown who it was at the desk at the time, had no doubt been erased, as it's set to erase every few weeks. To be honest, I am pulling my son away from this conflict, as it appears to be no way for recourse, a bad chapter in his working career, and to move on. The company hasn't even finalised his resignation, still waiting for holiday pay etc, nor asked for their uniform/entry fob back (which would have been deactivated). He will use this to actually open dialogue upon returning it. Thank you for giving me some pointers though

The email account address isn't! Would you be okay with someone accessing your personal email account and set you up for something you didn't do?

He went into my son's personal email account (gmail) on a day my son was not working (whilst covering a lunch period for someone else) using the work computer, snooped around my son's personal email, and sent himself an audio file that my son had sent to himself. The manager covered his tracks by removing the sent file from sent folder, so he would not notice, then claimed my son had sent it to him (the manager) in order to blackmail him. My son was not logged in to his personal email address on that computer that day (they sometimes did, if transferring information from their phone if an incident had to be logged and burnt on to disk), the manager had either used a keylogger or observed him logging in to gain his password. Plus the previous allegations, which my son won against to get my son dismissed. Would you consider this as acceptable?

Just to be clear, my lad was NOT dismissed, he was set up by his manager, which "may" have resulted in dismissal. We won't ever know if this second investigation, would have resulted in dismissal, as he did have evidence to the criminal actions of the manager - The manager certainly threw everything he could to try and achieve whatever agenda he has, by targeting him, harassing him and trying to frame him for blackmail being the penultimate, my lad couldn't take it any more, so resigned. I am glad he did, he's going through a lot, and quite honestly, doesn't need to be tarnished by something he hasn't done. Just hoped this individual gets the justice he deserves, as my lad is not the only one he's targetting, just first out the door.

@Whitelist to be honest, I don't know, as he didn't know what his options were. I guess there are none. I think he wants the manager to take accountability for what he has done to him over the past few months, and especially the invasion of his privacy and trying to set him up for something he would never have done. I don't believe it was the contracting company, or client targetting him for dismissal, but the manager solely. I guess, as @Ethel Street has said, he's worked under 2 years. Seems so wrong Thanks for you help, I don't think there is anything that can be done.

Hi Whitelist, Thank you for replying. So it does look like he may have been constructively targetted for either dismissal/leave by his own volition. Yes, he can provide proof of the events, including a transcript from the first investigation (20 pgs long!). Nonetheless, he doesn't have support from police to confirm his evidence, which will no longer exist. Instigating a tribunal may well be quite arduous at this time. As you say, might not even be worth it. As the police officer suggested it was "Civil" maybe, someone could tell me if a legal route is possible?

Hi, Hope you can help. I am asking for help with something that so far is being swept under the rug by my sons former (few weeks) employer. My son had been working as a security officer for just under a year, in a control room for a local shopping centre. Few months back, problems started to arise within the hierachy of the security firm contracted. Managers leaving or employment terminated, new acting managers etc. This didn't affect my lad, until sometime in June when the new acting manager, started to impose restrictions, of which had been previously allowed by previous managers. No proceedures & policies for employment had been signed, nonetheless, my lad was happy to compromise. Still this was not enough, and the then acting manager, set out to get my son out, by raising other issues, to the point the contracting security firm told him the client didn't want him on site, suggesting gross misconduct. He was not informed for days as to what he had done, (he called various people with no return calls) and when finally informed by email nearly 4 days later, with a list of things raised and an investigation meeting to be held a few days later with the acting manager. My lad felt there was a conflict of interest because the alligations involved the acting manager. After a month with full pay, a 3 hour investigation meeting was held and a few days after my son was invited back to work. No grievence charges, no dismissal etc. However, the then acting manager became manager. Keeping his head down, but listening to the woes of others, in particular of one of his collegues, who was suffering a lot of back lash from this manager, claiming his physical & mental health was getting so bad as a result, but also claiming that the manager was claiming things about certain people he was responsible to with the "Client" i.e. the shopping centre. My lad, recorded the conversation for his own recollection between themselves. He had no intention of using it for anything neferious, just purely, so he didn't get anything wrong if asked. He sent the audio to his personal email address from his mobile. Never accessed it from the work computer. Literally, a few days back on duty. He was rung and told he was under investigation again. This time he was told for trying to blackmail this manager, by sending him this recording. He had not! Whilst still on duty I told him to check the cache for any data pertaining to this, and he did, and he found that his personal email address had been logged into during a day shift (he worked nights), on a day he wasn't working, he also found that not only this, but other emails within his personal email account all pertaining to his employment had been viewed, and that the said email containing the audio file, had been sent to the manager (it then must have been deleted within sent open looking at email account so he didn't see it). Looking at the logs, the person in the control room at the time, covering the controller was the manager. My lad screen shotted everything, photographed everything as well, left the file of screen shots on computer in a safe place for the client or police, because he knew that the cache records could be erased once told about, and that the CCTV (they are always watched) would soon erase itself. He raised it with the area managers, told them he had proof, and was going to report it to the police. In between, my son started suffering with vision problems, it actually started few months before, but got worse with all the stress he was under, he didn't know what was happening, until one morning he woke up blind for a few seconds in one eye. He took the day off to go to hospital. He was suffering from inflamed optic nerves, which left untreated can make you go blind, so he had a lot on his plate. Upon his return to work, he was called into the office with the deputy manager to fill out forms for his day off. My lad was wary from the beginning as it seemed a bit unusual, and then the manager came in and started talking in a derogatory way about my lad to the deputy manager, of things he had accused him of during the first investigation, of which he ponted out he wasn't reprimanded in anyway. I understand there was some back and forth dialogue, but no swear words or anything like this, but son was so angry by this humiliation, he up'd and left, on the spot and didn't finish his shift. Couldn't take anymore, wrote letter of resignation that night. He did inform the police, he went through the process accessible to him, and even rang the next morning to clarify as the online system of reporting didn't allow him to specify everything. Few days later, he was later contacted by the area manager and asked if he really did want to resign, and he said, yes. He was told he wouldn't know the outcome of the new investigation. Fair enough but hoped that one of his ex collegues would tell him. The crux of this, the police this morinng rang him to tell him they are not going to persue it, because "it's not in the public interest". He was told it was his fault for leaving his email logged in, which he had not, and said to the officer you are making a presumption there, and have you actually obtained the CCTV in that time, or actually done any investigation, and his response was it's a civil matter and no he hadn't. He also told him, because he had left before the investigation as he knew he would be sacked?? What? That's not the reason he left. Another presumption? He feels he's been royally stitched up, harrassed, ignored and with no address leading to accountability. My son is very poorly suffering with IIH, lots of medical procedures, appointments with specialist and cannot work at the moment, he has no savings, and huge rent to pay, he has applied for benefits until he's well enough to secure another job. That's stressful enough, and one might say let it go, but this on top, just makes him feel totally incapacitated and without hope. I just would like to be able to find out if there is anything he else he should be doing against his former employers, and especially this manager who entered his personal email account, sent a file from it, in order to make out he was being blackmailed to himself, or a complaint to police for not investigating this. Surely if someone with either a keylogger or CCTV footage in the workplace, goes into your private email address its our equivilant of GDPR breach? How did he know about the audio in the first place? A listening device? surely there must be some wrong doing, negligence or malpractice in the work place? Would appreciate any advice and suggestions. TX in advance.

Thanks for Steampowered and Conniff, as 3 of the documents have been removed, not sure your getting the full picture. Only mine left. Beginning to dislike this site, shall not be guiding people to here any more. Please remove my account.

Can those who are familiar with legally binding documents please look over this agreement? I am meant to sign by 23rd Jan. I am uncomfortable with the whole issue, but even more with the agreement as it appears to have commas in which I always understood could lead to ambiguity. I have also included previous correspondence on the issue. Would appreciate advice, many thanks in advance.

Could someone tell if I "have" to reply to the solicitors letter by the date they specify? i.e. 5th. Just I rang the IP office and had some interesting information given to me and I want to be able to put it in letter which I have composed, but my brain aches at moment and there's no way I am going to get it finished by last post. I am guessing that actually, if it's not court ordered, I actually don't have any obligation to reply by their set date.

Thank you Steampowered for clarifying that.

Yes, I have realised that Bankfodder, but I feel that's a little unfair to close the post, isn't this is after all for all to comment on? Others may have other information that haven't seen this thread yet and might offer other useful info, apart from your very appreciated info???

My second communication in response to the served paper work: sent 7/11/14 Dear Sirs, Header in Caps I write regarding the above. I am astonished at the extraordinary lengths your client has gone to notify me of his demands considering my return reply the very same day, in response to his initial email (see attached); where I gave Mr xxx the opportunity to embark amicably in resolving his concerns. If only your client had employed someone to do some proper investigative work, which wouldn't have taken much in all honesty, rather than confront me unnecessarily in town on a Sunday morning, we might have resolved this a lot sooner. As a result, I am informing you that I am in the process of taking legal advice. However, due to a prearranged personal commitment I will not be available until 1st December 2014, whereafter, I hope to be in a position to answer your letter. Meanwhile, I am happy to deactivate my twitter and facebook accounts and put a disclaimer on my website in the interim as a show of good will. I trust this is acceptable to your client. Yours sincerely, xxx Their reply: [ATTACH=CONFIG]54700[/ATTACH] of which I must reply by tomorrow. The served letter of which I am addressing. [ATTACH=CONFIG]54701[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]54702[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]54703[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]54704[/ATTACH] this is the one I am questioning, there is more, but I don't think I need to put it up as it's just their screen shots of the sites and FB and Twitter account. Hope it makes a bit more sense. SORRY CAN'T SEEM TO DELETE REALISED THE IMAGES HAVE BEEN SHRUNK TO UNREADABLE SIZE

Here is the start of the correspondence [ATTACH=CONFIG]54698[/ATTACH] first contact 30 May 2014 [ATTACH=CONFIG]54699[/ATTACH] my reply 30th May 2014 Not sure how this will come out so will just add these two now.

Thank You Sadie de Rue for informational links, however I like Bankfodder am unsure of how it relates to infringement of a name and therefore their business? I have read through both links and although I don't understand most of it, what I can glean is that the reference to in "British Leyland Defence" is it relates to copyrights being breached when it comes to spare parts, and those manufacturers whom make a similar design whether based on copying the original 3d version and tweaking the design. Therefore, monopolisation and stifling the competition essentially. Which in a sense yes, the person I am up against is actually trying to monopolise and stifle any competition, that is clear via his trademark application. Nonetheless, I feel it's likely that I am causing confusing regarding this as I am being frugal with info. I have decided to put up all correspondence with personal details omitted, so a more accurate picture can be seen. I will also include a version of the domain name with the first part omitted, it won't take much to realise the omitted part. Thank you Steampowered for your post and info, I will take all into consideration upon writing this draft, however, just one thing, the "without prejudice save as to costs" what am I actually saying there? I haven't replied in any of my correspondence "without prejudice" for the reason, it can't be used in court unless I believe both agrees. If this was to go to court (that isn't my intention unless absolutely pushed to do so) I want them to see that I have been cooperative from the beginning, regardless of as Bankfodder calls it "feisty" .

Thank you Bankfodder for your in depth reply, appreciated. Can you clarify as to how you are basing this info on, is it experienced legal knowledge or information found on web? So, from your post it would appear that I haven't a leg to stand on although, through research I have conducted, and with the Solicitors suggestion that I do have a case for rebuttal, I thought I might have some leverage. Do you not feel I have a case to ask for out of pocket expenses (you don't mention it), ie I am being made to transfer my domain to someone who doesn't own it and my website would have to be updated accordingly, that wouldn't happen if they weren't making their demands. By the way, they only contacted me when I got nearer to the front page of search engines, now I am on front page, which is what I believe actually prompted them to come after me, (my design skills better than their own obviously , considering they pay £20k per month to Google according to them on advertising and I pay...zero) however even with my web designing prowess , I have not had any enquiries since, never had any business via the site, so I am realistic enough to know when to let go something not serving me. However, I am not being bullied into releasing my domain for something I did not do, i.e. intentionally set up on the back of another. I wouldn't do that. I don't read papers, and I don't watch TV, so I had never heard of them, none of my pet business and pet loving peeps have even heard of them either! So, it's not like I got an idea from them, I simply got the idea of the name, from being called it after I did a good deed. The name was available to purchase years after, and easily purchased ie with no warning which is what normally happens if registrar has been informed for the potential to infringe on another's business. My site was as you say innocently set up as a way of people accessing information about me and my service. I also feel that even though you say our services will be deemed the same or similar, that they are very different services regardless of the area. They are no more than brokers for a service such as I provide, in my local area, and anyone visiting my site will see this immediately, therefore, very unlikely to be confused by the name which is apparent a reflection of that, and is used in it's descriptive sense. Am I truly a threat? It's something I would like to put in the reply letter. Well according to them I am, yet since I put my site up they claim to have a turnover of over a million a year, yet their company accounts submitted last year, which I gained full copies of, says otherwise, they only made £96,000 in 12-13, so, if that is the case in the last year and a half, then I am no threat at all as they have increased their profits by over 1000% in that time, and I have taken a big fat zero. I find it ironic, that ICANN can introduce single and plural TLD's at the beginning of the year, i.e. .Car vs .Cars and believing that they can coexist, regardless of creating potential traps for those like myself, personally I believe they can happily co exist, as people are not as stupid or easily confused as the legal system makes out. There are plenty of companys out there with similar sounding names, even same names, and they generally continue to trade and I am happy to say those types like Daimler AG vs Sany Group Company Ltd where Sany won regarding a similar but not the same logo even though they were in the similar niche gives me hope that things will change. By the way, my case is very similar to UDRP case Businessesforsale.com and Businessforsale.com who do Exactly the same thing, even look the same, when one challenged the other, the defending party won (although one of the panellist didn't agree) and that was what I was basing my own comparison on. http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/text.jsp?case=D2013-2118 What it appears to come down to is MONEY, they have opted for a route I can't defend myself based on my financial circumstance, ordinarily such disputes go via UDRP, I do not have the resources to defend myself in a High court and they know it. However, I have no assets and £1 a month is likely what they would get out of me if ruled in their favour. There's a part of me that would like to see the claimant experience this. So they have me as you put it on a road for hiding for nothing, i do feel that I should at least stand up against their bully boy tactics and respond in a way that they know I will mean business, maybe I am wrong here, but really what do I have to lose, that isn't being taken from me already? I will compose a draft and everyone who's interested see what they think. Oh and if anyone wants to see the actual correspondence , happy to put them up with obvious bits removed, just in case I have missed out on saying something.

Yes, it was rather full! Thanks CitizenB, have sent you PM with info. Maybe you could judge if acceptable for info to be visible.

Tried to send you pm with info won't go through

Oh dear was hoping that wouldn't be asked for as I know the search engines could pick it up. Do you mind me sending it in a PM to you? Or do you think it's safe on here?

Hi peeps, here we go again. Every year there seems to be something, even though been trying to keep my head down low! So I need some advice. Last year (1 year 7 months ago) I purchased a domain for a potential get back "into work business", I purchased the domain name based on personal experience and the service provided. I checked IP search and at the time there was "no trademark" nor application for one. I had no trouble securing the domain I wanted. Upon developing the website I noticed another website with a similar plural version of my domain name although a different TLD. The website was not providing the same service but providing a connection between people such as myself and those who wanted people such as myself. A portal. Plural and Singular domains often coexist, and as our services were different although in similar area, I didn't think anything more of it. End of this May, I received a personal email basically telling me I had infringed on their IP due to complaint/confusions, that I set up the website in "bad faith" claiming I am "passing off" against their name and threatening court which will be extremely costly to me. I responded immediately, reasons I was denying this claim and that this claim appeared to be an attempt at "reverse domain name hijacking". Nonetheless, I offered a compromise of a disclaimer, and if this was not acceptable to consider alternatives that would satisfy them. I didn't hear anything back from them, until few weeks ago just prior to going on the first holiday in 8 years. Literally few days before. I was setting up a market stall on a Sunday morning in town, when a man came up to me and said you have been served regarding a domain you own. I was so shocked! Basically a package with letter, form to sign on my own headed paper, and images of my website, twitter and facebook and theirs. It was from a solicitors in London now acting on behalf of the man who contacted me initially. They are very prestigious by all accounts. Their claim infringement of IP and demanding I hand over my domain to them immediately and sign the paper to the affect I would remove my fb and twitter account, not set up another similar sounding website or (and this is what got me) any variations and pay costs. (front page said if I did this by x time they would waver costs). I contacted an IP lawyer who gave a free initial consultation, sent him docs, and he felt that yes they had a case but I also had one and that it was going to cost me at least £600 to start the process of rebuttal. Well, I didn't have that kind of money. My holiday was a birthday present from my family and not wanting to dampen my holiday, I wrote back saying I had prearrangement and i would get legal advice upon my return, but as a gesture of good will I would put a disclaimer on my website, and deactivate (not delete) my fb and twitter accounts in the interim. They wrote email and letter back saying the noted the deactivation and have given me till 5th Dec. So, here I am. Been doing lots of research on their alleged intellectual property rights. They first applied to trademark in oct 13 months after I had set up site, but it was in response to someone else trying to get trademarks, they opposed it, and managed to get the other parties application over turned, however their own application was withdrawn (due to non payment of second fee). They then applied for a EU trade mark with an image of their website name, it's in the publishing stage, but they also are trying to get that name IP (uk) and that's in the examination stage. So technically, they don't own the trademark of that name, yet. They have a case under "common law". Sorry it's long and not to bare my predicament any longer, just wondering how I should tackle this? I am happy to remove website (as I have had no client so far via it) for out of pocket expenses (realistic wise) and set up with a new domain however suggesting this may be deemed as my intention which it most certainly was not! I feel their demands of signing to any variants is unreasonable without stating what those variants are, due to the descriptive and generic nature of the service, and area they could oppose me at every turn. Would truly appreciate any help and advice, thought tackling Barclays was hard enough but this is way out of my league!

How did this turn out Lababy? Did they back down? Would be very interested to know outcome.