Hi - just an update to say the JM went fine and a settlement was reached that I was satisfied with - just waiting for the cheque! Strange set-up though - we had 3 separate rooms with the judge in the middle room going back and forth as a go-between. When we reached an agreement we all met up in the judge's room and had an open phone call with ACAS while the judge hid in an ante-room! They had on their side: the senior manager, someone from their legal section and someone from HR, counsel, and counsel's pupil. I had: me and a friend. The whole day was a series of negotiations, I am pleased with how we handled it on our side and relieved that it is all over and I don't have to wait another six months preparing papers and witnesses for a 5 day hearing. I would recommend Judicial Mediation for anyone that is clear about their case and doesn't want to spend half their life dealing with it.

My son has just been refused a credit card by Nationwide. I don't know what to advise him. Should he try somewhere else e.g. he banks with the Co-op, or does more searches lower his credit score? He will be looking for a mortgage soon. He has an existing credit card debt which he pays off regularly but he is paying so much in interest that he wanted to do a credit transfer for the interest free period.

Thanks honeybee - we'll see.

Update - the CMD went OK. All the judge really wanted to establish was that there was enough interest on both sides to reach a settlement to make a JM worthwhile. It ties up an employment judge for a day so they don't like to go ahead if it looks like it will still go to full tribunal. Looks like the JM will take place late October/early November.

Thanks, will keep you posted.

I have spoken to ACAS and, as I understand it, if we come to an agreement at JM there is then a link up with ACAS to wrap it up and make it legally binding. The JM is also presided over by an ET judge who is specially trained in mediation. In truth I believe that both sides here would have a vested interest in clearing this up sooner rather than later. I will not have legal representation at a JM or a trial, I am afraid that my experience of representation has been that I could have done a better job myself. Guess this is where I put that theory to the test!

Thanks Papasmurf, the bit about Judicial Skirmishing is very helpful. i was assuming that this was not the place where any detailed discussion about the claim itself would take place but it seems this will be the nub of the meeting. This means that I will have to do much more detailed preparation. As both sides had to formally indicate whether they were interested at all in JM the fact that we were progressing this at all indicated that the respondent had also confirmed their interest so one would assume they were not digging in their heels completely otherwise why not reject JM outright and go straight to the hearing? Not sure about the reference to when a JM would be held as I thought the whole point was to ease the pressure on the system as there is almost another year before the hearing. Can see why lawyers might be keen to avoid JM in that case - think of all that money they then won't earn preparing witness statements etc. Or am I just being cynical?

Thanks for that. I did have this information as it was supplied by the judge in order for me to decide whether this was an avenue I wished to pursue. i am clear (I think) about how JM works, what I am not clear about is the point of this case management discussion. If it is just to agree whether or not we go to JM and when it is held etc. why do we need to refer to any documents or take an hour deciding?

Hello anyone who can help. I am representing myself at an ET and at the last case conference we were asked to consider Judicial Mediation. I responded in the given period that I would be interested and have now had a notice of a case management discussion by telephone. This is to: (a) consider whether the parties wish to proceed with a Judicial Mediation, (b) if so to make appropriate arrangements for the conduct of the JM, and © give any other directions which may be necessary.So far so clear. However I am confused by two things: one is that this CMD has been given a time allocation of 1 hour - given the agenda this seems somewhat excessive, and secondly we are asked that if we wish to refer to documents copies must be faxed/emailed to the Tribunal, again given the agenda I cannot think what documents anyone could wish to refer to.Am I missing something? Is this not a straightforward 'do we proceed with a JM or not and if so when, where, how should it be held etc?Any thoughts useful - the CMD is imminent. Thanks.