The tribunal was a few years ago and i didnt have the evidence then but i have it now. The employer lied to the court about details which the tribunal took as true and used them to find my dismissal fair. Without these false details the court would almost certainly have found in my favour. It wasnt a case of they made a mistake with the details, the evidence i have shows they knew the correct details and told the court something else. I didnt appeal because i didnt have the evidence then and you only get 42 days to file an appeal. Ive heard of perjury cases being brought up to 14 years after someone has lied in court ie jeffrey archer. If a lie affects the outcome of a hearing then it shouldnt matter if its a criminal court or an employment court. How do i go about getting my employer taken to court for committing perjury? Who do i report him to?

Last October, I emailed my then landlord to say that I’d be paying part of my final rent out of my deposit. He replied minutes later with the following: 'Non payment of the agreed monthly amount on the date agreed by you on the agreement you have signed will result in a violation of our agreement and you will be asked to leave within 7 days of this email due to this exposing breach of contract and your deposit will count as rent owing’. Soon thereafter, he confronted me in person. As I was unwilling to relent, he said he’d change the locks and throw my stuff out that day. I phoned the police, who told me that would be criminal offence. As a result of this, my landlord relented. He instead said that, if I didn’t leave that day, he would ‘make your life hell’, adding that he would invite some friends around to party in the property (he knew I was a light sleeper). As a result, I vacated the property after gathering some of my belongings, and gave him his key back (which was mistake, but I was in a great deal of distress and not thinking clearly). I’m now suing my ex-landlord for my deposit and unspent rent, and for the distress and inconvenience his illegal eviction has caused. He is claiming in his written defence that I left voluntarily and not under duress, on the grounds that I handed him back my key. If he says that in court, would it be grounds for a him to be charged with perjury, given that: - No sane person would vacate a property when they have no-where to go to, especially when they have work the next day (and my new landlady would be able to attest that I contacted her for the first time on that day, which was the day I moved into her property). - On my recording of my call to the police, I can be heard pleading with him to let me at least stay till the end of the week. - He shows in his email that he’s willing to disregard the law (by threatening to ask me to leave within 7 days and to withhold my deposit). Thanks Jeff

Please help running out of options. Judge threw out our statutory declaration as out of time. No one will overturn judges decision despite all the evidence. We bought a car in 2011 from a neighbour. Registered and insured it. Two days later that car was stolen from us. The police were informed and took a statement for it to be reported stolen. They never found the car and it was never returned to us. The police told us to write off what we had paid for the car and cut all ties to it. We did this and cancelled the insurance we had. Apparently the dvla took us to court ( without our knowledge ) have said the case was successfully prosecuted. It was prosecuted because we never received the court summons so never turned up. The case was for keeping a vehicle that does not meet insurance standards. Our appeal was accepted in 2013 and the case was closed. The same appeal was sent to the dvla but they didn't respond until 2014 and it was no comment. Fast forward to Saturday 5th September baliffs banging down the door, assaulted me by forcing the door back on me and used an illegal threshold manoeuvre. Illegally clamped our (fully insured, fully taxed) vehicle and the police made us hand over our keys. Thursday 10th September the baliffs steals our car without authorisation and hits me side on with his vehicle when I ran out to get a warrant or authorisation from him. Marston's baliffs seem to act like rabid dogs all the time! Disgusting creatures to deal with. He was forced to return our car and the keys on Friday September 11th which he did. He also made a report against me for criminal damage. Apparently I ran out into the road and struck his fast moving vehicle! if I had been able to strike his fast moving vehicle the injuries to my arm would be on the inside of my arm not the outside. Personal injury solicitor taking my case against him. Same Friday judge threw out our statutory declaration as out of time. We are not paying a debt we do not owe as we have no legal obligation to insure a car we do not own and was stolen from us. The amount is £628 plus baliffs fees which they told us is triple the amount. Where do we go next please?

hi if the respondent submits false allegations, everything from theft, drug use, violence etc., in the desperate attempt to defame the whistle-blower, can they be sued in turn for making defamatory claims and committing perjury, hearing goes public shortly??

I have an interesting (I hope) story to share with my fellow CAG's: I had an account with HSBC Bank International Ltd (the "Bank") at the Isle of Man for many years. In 2009 / 2010 the account was at its overdraft limit. I had a direct debit to a HSBC branded life insurance policy (Aviva was the underwriter, it was just HSBC branded). The Bank bounced my DD to the insurance. I receive a letter in the post stating the policy is null and void becausre of the returned DD. I speak to Aviva, yes the policy is now dead. I speak to another insurance co and obtain replacement life cover. The Bank meanwhile reinstitutes the DD and takes the money for the next two months before I notice. I speak to Aviva again, no they cannot and did not restart a DD and yes the policy is dead (all via a written letter). So if I didn't start the DD again and Aviva didn't that only leaves HSBC! I get very angry with HSBC, scream and shout at them. They respond by returning the money they stole and state that the matter is now closed! My view: they stole my money, sure they gave it back but they need to do a lot more to make the problem go away; imagine if roles were reversed! In Q3 2010 DG Solicitors sue me via Nothampton CC. I put in my defense pointing out that the Claimant is not HSBC Bank plc but rather HSBC Bank International Limited plus that the Bank pinhed my pocket and needs to do more than return my money. 33 days go by and the Bank does not respond so the claim is stayed. In December 2012 the Bank applies to Nothampton to strike out my defense under CPR 3.4(2) and applies for summary judgement. Among other statements by the Bank is that HSBC Bank International Ltd does not and has never existed. Northampton grants the stay being lifted (27 months after the claim), strikes out my defense and transfers the claim to my local court. The first thing I hear of this is the notice from Northampton that my defense has been struck out and the application for summary judgemnt transferred to my local court. I apply to my local court to set aside the decision of Notrthampton and to find the applicant (DG is HSBC and vice versa) guilty or perjury as HSBC Bank International Limited does exist! Now I have a hearing in mid February to reverse Northampton. My view is to attach CPR 3.4(2) because the Claimant waited 27 months contrary Practise Direction 23 that it is done "as soon as possible". I attack lifting the stay because the delay has prejudiced my position as I need to rebuild my case after 27 months. The perjury / contempt of court: the claimant obviously knows where my account was held and obviously knows the jurisdicton. That it lied to Northampton so as to obtain the decision it did is prima facie evidence of perjury / contempt of court. Please give me your views of the foregoing!

http://www.scotsman.com/news/scottish-news/top-stories/scottish-police-charge-andy-coulson-with-tommy-sheridan-trial-perjury-1-2326534 Given the circumstances, it must really be against his interests to open his mouth in court for his defence. Yet to defend the case would require cutting up his previous mates. Pleading guilty without a trial (based on the Sheridan verdict) would be likely to get him two years.