If you have been employed for more than 12 months then they have to follow a fair reason to dismiss you for redundancy. As there are less than 20 of you being dismissed from one establishment then they should write to you telling you why you are at risk, then hold a meeting with you, to which you have the right to be accompanied, and then if you are made redundant you should have a right of appeal. If they miss any one of those stages (and it sounds like they have) the dismissal will be automatically unfair.

If you have the tickets and payment has been taken then the contact has been concluded. If they were to breach that contract by revoking the tickets you could potently sue them for the higher priced tickets you would have to buy. PS – this is based on the assumption that the laws of England and Wales apply!

If they have accepted your offer by sending you the E Tickets it sounds like you have a deal. In most cases they only send out an email to say it's being processed and that they will confirm the contract later. However, the law on e-contacts is fairly complex. It should state in their Ts&Cs when the contract is formed these days. have a read and see if you have a binding contract, if you do they cant do anything about it.

as you dont legaly have to display it at all you could keep it in the glovebox unless it was going to be seen by your employers.

If you and only ever you use the vehicle then it does not need to have a sign. But most large employers will insist all vehicles have the signs displayed. It’s hardly the end of the world though is it?

No offence intended Calvi, From the first post he appears to have been told he will be not given the new position, it seems logical to assume he has been dismissed or is on notice of dismissal. He can walk away or claim the Tribunal.

Even if it is a genuine redundancy the employer must follow a fair procedure for it to be a fair dismissal. Most cases are won on procedural failings in the Tribunal.

He has nothing to lose in puttin a claim in, it's free and they may make him an offer to avoid the cost and hasstle of defending what sounds a bit "dodgy". He can apply online via: Employment Tribunals - Claiming and responding dealines are very tight though, he has 3 months from the dismissal to get his claim in.

Hah! good luck I have been trying to get statements from Sky for Months now, they keep promising to send them but they never do. They make up new figures each time I speak to them and are generally entirely clueless. Good luck!

It sounds like they have claimed it was a redundancy, but to do that they would have to say that the new job was significantly different to the old one. Cant say from the facts given if they have done so. Perhaps more importantly is weather they complied with the statutory dismissal procedure. They should have written to him to explain why his job was at risk, held a meeting with him before deciding to dismiss then offered him a right of appeal. If any one of those steps was missed then he was automatically unfairly dismissed and should bring a claim in the employment tribunal. From what you say, I sounds like there may well have been no right of appeal offered.

erm, no one made you buy anything at all, so you stand like a person who wasn't blackmailed.

This is not case where you could exercise a lien. In most cases you cant hold onto property just because there is debt, unless the debt relates to that property. If he was owed money for fixing the digger, then it would apply. As such if the owner wants it back he would have to let him collect it. But until the owner asks for it back he can hold onto it as a bargaining tool.

2 points – If a letter is a genuine attempt to settle the claim it will be without prejudice even if it doesn’t have those words on it. Putting the words on doesn’t make something that is not “WP”, “WP”. Lots of people put “WP” on documents which are not privileged because they don’t understand what it means. If it is not a genuine attempt to settle the claim then it is disclosable to the court. What they mean by they reserve the right to tell the court about it, referees only to the matter of costs. If they succeed they will then show the curt the letter to show that you should have taken an offer and saved them costs. The fact you didn’t can be used to justify a higher cost award. But they cannot and must not show that letter or the offer to the court until judgement has been given either way. I hope that helps.

The first issue is weather or not the decision is confidential at all. Just putting the words confidential on it would be unlikely to be enough. I don’t know but I would have thought that the decision of an ombudsman would be a public document. If it is a confidential document is the whole document confidential or only the identify of the parties? It’s not easy to say without knowing the details but it may be the case that the whole document is confidential so referring to recommendations in the letter could be a breach of the confidentiality so far as the other student is concerned. But I have to say it seems unlikely. I would suggest asking the university to explain in what was confidentiality has been breached before you are able to respond to their allegation.

Send either a complaint to the information commissioner or give them 7 days to comply with your subject access request in writing before you do. And as someone else said, is the data not there for you to see?