Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'respondent'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • The Consumer Forums: The Mall
    • Welcome to the Consumer Forums
    • FAQs
    • Forum Rules - Please read before posting
    • Consumer Forums website - Post Your Questions & Suggestions about this site
    • Helpful Organisations
    • The Bear Garden – for off-topic chat
  • CAG Community centre
    • CAG Community Centre Subforums:-
  • Consumer TV/Radio Listings
    • Consumer TV and Radio Listings
  • CAG Library - Please register
    • CAG library Subforums
  • Banks, Loans & Credit
    • Bank and Finance Subforums:
    • Other Institutions
  • Retail and Non-retail Goods and Services
    • Non-Retail subforums
    • Retail Subforums
  • Work, Social and Community
    • Work, Social and Community Subforums:
  • Debt problems - including homes/ mortgages, PayDay Loans
    • Debt subforums:
    • PayDay loan and other Short Term Loans subforum:
  • Motoring
    • Motoring subforums
  • Legal Forums
    • Legal Issues subforums

Categories

  • News from the National Consumer Service
  • News from the Web

Blogs

  • A Say in the Life of .....
  • Debt Diaries
  • Shopping & Money Saving Tips
  • chilleddrivingtuition

Categories

  • The Youth Academy
    • The Youth Consumer Service
  • Miscellaneous

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


About Me


Location

Found 6 results

  1. Disability discrimination claim. The Respondent is producing the bundle. I have sent them my index of documents with each document very efficiently named and dated for clarity, relevancy and easy navigation. The Respondent completely renamed all of my documents within the index to make themselves sound good and to make my documents difficult to find seem extremely confusing, sound irrelevant and also to contain repetitive document names for less clarity and greater confusion. Some of the names of documents they’ve renamed do not reflect the contents of the documents in any way whats
  2. Hello All - Ist time post. In seeking further disclosures from the Respondent prior to ET, is the correspondence to and from them able to be discussed at the ET hearing?
  3. I had a letter today from the Respondents demanding £800 by Monday for the bundle cost. The Employment Judge agreed to my request there be a £500 cap on the cost, although it is not in the Order from the Preliminary Hearing. I believe the Respondent has deliberately made it as expensive as possible. The are a quasi-legal firm and produce hundreds of bundles every year in the normal course of work. They have a photocopier machine contract which makes the cost a fraction of a pound for each copy, plus teams of administrators who routinely collate them. They have already turned u
  4. Good evening fellow CAGgers, I have the following problem. I have a pending Employment Tribunal hearing in some 1.5 months and now it is a disclosure phase. The Respondent tries whatever they can in their powers (via a representative) to delay the disclosure. They gave me estimate for delivering the requested documents which was far beyond the date the ET Judge set for agreeing on the bundle. Also, I cannot be sure that they will give me all the docs I requested, they are saying they will first establish the relevance of those to the case. What can I do to force them to dis
  5. Hi all, I have a full 10 day hearing coming up for discrimination, whistle-blowing, victimization, harassment & constructive dismissal. The respondents asked me to forward a figure that i would settle for. I did this and now i have received a nasty letter from them. The respondents response is that they will only explore settlement if i drop the whistle-blowing element of the claim. This is odd as they asked me to give them a figure and now they are saying they will not explore settlement until i drop the whistle-blowing element. The respondents are the big public sect
  6. Hi people! Just a quick bit of advice needed please, as I have found myself out of my depth... I worked for Company A which is owned by Company B, though the nature of meant I worked for company B whilst my contract was with company A. Apologies for how confusing this may seem! I initiated an ET claim against Company B, as the employees which carried out the discriminatory acts were employed by Company B. Company B is essentially the head office, but Company A is the subsidiary company, wholly owned by B but based offshore. So having filed an ET1 with a complaint against
×
×
  • Create New...