Employment Tribunal - Advise Needed

[cardiffboy500]

Hello

 

I am sorry to start on the forum as a 1st time asker, having not been able to provide advise to anyone else yet, but I promise I will keep an eye out for any topics I can help with.

 

I have started ET proceedings against a company and need a spot of advise. I was discriminated against at the interview on the grounds of age, and was turned down from the post by letter 3 weeks later, "the only reason being your age, you are too young for this role" - I should point out I am 30, and was applying for a role that I was more than capable of and have done in the past.

 

Anyway, I sought some advise and went through the usual routes for an employment discrimination case. The respondent has replied with their ET3, a copy of which I received today. The respondent has said that there is no case to be held accountable for, as the company that owns the property that I was due to manage is YYYYY Ltd and I have started ET proceedings against XXXX Ltd. Now the job was advertised by XXXX Ltd, at the interview I was given the interviewers business card which has XXXX Ltd as the company name. The regret letter was on XXXX Ltd headed paper. The respondent completed the DTI questionnaire I sent them and completed the company details as XXXX Ltd, they also sent the questionnaire back with an XXXX Ltd compliments slip attached. The company website doesn't make any reference to what the legal trading name is. I should point out that both XXXX Ltd and YYYY Ltd appear to be owned by the same person, the person who interviewed me and respondent to my claim.

 

There has never been any mention of YYYY Ltd in any correspondance until today.

 

I am in the process of writing back to the ET service, with copied of all the paper trail showing XXXX Ltd on it, however I don't want to lose the case on a technicality like legal ownership. Should I present what I have detailed above to the ET service and point out that this just appears to be a stalling or time wasting tactic, or try and amend the claim (or retract it and start a new claim) so it is against YYYY Ltd.

 

Any advise would be very gratefully received.

 

Many Thanks

 

Paul:confused:

 

(of course those are not the real company names)

Edited April 28, 2010 by cardiffboy500
more accurate title needed

[Bigredbus]

Are the registered adresses for both X and Y the same?

[cardiffboy500]

No, the registered address for YYYY Ltd appears to be the premises where I applied to work and the address for XXXX Ltd is a nearby brewery.

[Bigredbus]

The job advertisement and the interview has been conducted by company X... which, in turn, sent a 'regret' on X headed letter and X compliment slip... Questionnaire has been sent to X and filled by X...

 

Is he trying to evade his responsibilities?

 

Contact the ET and inform them about it... you will be able to amend if necessary...

[cardiffboy500]

Ok, thanks for the advise, I will send the ET a detailed copy of what I have said above and see what happens from there. The Respondent seems to think he is above the law, in most respects, and yes this looks like another attempt to avoid being answerable for his actions. Lets just say he is not too impressed with my actions and has sent a few emails with an assortment of threats and counter-accusations. Most recently accusing me of extortion.

 

Anyway, I will see what happens and share with you all the outcome.

 

Paul

[honeybee13]

Hi there, nice to see you on the forum. We've seen lots of employers who think they're above the law, and not just small companies. I'm sure you'll be fine with careful research.

 

I'd love to be too young for a role....

 

HB

[Bigredbus]

Hi hi hi... @ 'honeybee13'

[honeybee13]

Good evening.

[Bigredbus]

Anyway... when you filled in your ET1, following the directives, for the respondent, you had to enter their address... [Y]ou shoud be able to identify this by looking at the letter that offered you the job...

Edited April 28, 2010 by Bigredbus
Typo galore...

[zooch]

If he had send you email threatening you maybe you should use this in the bundle? Do you feel afraid for your safety from these emails?

[cardiffboy500]

His emails are always marked 'Without Prejudice', however because of the tone of the email, and the lack of an offer to settle the argument, I am off the understanding that he cannot hide behind 'WP'. Anyway, I have submitted them to the ET with a cover note anyway. They can decide to include them or not.

[cardiffboy500]

Thanks for all the advice on this. I am pleased to say that after submitted a substantial pile of evidence to the ET I have had their judgement today. They have directed that XXXX Ltd remain as a Respondent for the case, but has added YYYY Ltd as an additional Respondent. So the battle continues!!

[Bigredbus]

Hi, hi, hi...

 

He, now, has no place to hide...

 

[cardiffboy500]

Thanks Big Red Bus.

 

Interestingly I received an email from the Respondent this afternoon

 

 

Dear Cardiffboy500

 

Please understand I have no desire to have anything to do with you. You are trying to extort money from my company and let me re assure you, you have no entitlement to any money from me, YYYY Ltd or for that matter XXXX Ltd.

 

We have instructed lawyers and will be seeking costs from the Tribunal. I have instructed my lawyers to instruct one of the top Employment Counsels in Wales, and we will demonstrate that it was your overall scoring that let you down not your age.

 

Please do not write any further to me, direct any comments you require answers to the Employment Tribunal.

 

We have submitted a request for further and better particulars.

 

When this matter is over I will make sure that you never work in this industry again in Wales.

 

Your sincerely,

 

A. N. Other

 

YYYY Ltd

 

 

 

I am not at all concerned about legal costs from his party. ET would rarely grant costs to the other side as far as I am aware, I have a solid case with strong evidence. Even if he wins his case and gets awarded costs, I have no assets, only a small amount of cash in the bank, I spend what I earn!!

 

However the 'threats' contained in the email are now getting unpleasant. His entire attitude has changed since I submitted the pre ET questionnaire, and I am not expecting him to be my new best friend, but there is no need for that. I am reading that, if I don't drop my actions, he will spread malicious rumours about me so as to put off any would be employer.

 

This appears to be bullying tactics now, should I send a copy of this to the ET. Is it likely to count in my favour or will I just look like a moaning minnie.

 

I will try and keep you all up to date with this ET case, it could be an interesting one, I haven't seen an Age Discrimination case where the claimant is 29 (Neither particularly young or old).

[honeybee13]

Hi there. No comfort for you, but this becomes more and more interesting. I don't claim to be an ET expert, but hopefully one will be along soon. I would have thought the ET could be very interested in the email and I'm amazed he's daft enough to go into print. I find it hard to believe that any decent lawyer would advise doing this. I haven't gone back over all your thread, but do you really think he'll take counsel to an ET??????

 

Let's hope you get some comments saying if I'm right or not shortly.

 

My best, HB

[Bigredbus]

Hi,

 

I suppose his e-mails are marked 'without prejudice', again?

 

Nevertheless, I would now inform the Tribunal of those e-mails as per the content... the consequences of such acts, if initiated, could well have serious implications on your professional future...

 

However, I wish him the best counsel, as when the judge will make mention of those e-mails before him/her, s/he will have no other option but to get the tissue box out of his bag...

[cardiffboy500]

No, he has given up with the WP banner now. So I have no qualms about sharing them.

 

Nevertheless, I would now inform the Tribunal of those e-mails as per the content... the consequences of such acts, if initiated, could well have serious implications on your professional future...

 

I love this phrase bigredbus, and may well steal it to put on my cover note to the ET.

 

Thanks!!

[Bigredbus]

What a 'nini' (if I may borrow the expression) he is...

 

If we (CAGGERS) can be of any help... you are more than welcome...

 

[cardiffboy500]

Thanks, you CAGGERS are great. I feel confident in taking this guy on without legal representation, but it is great just having the support of you guys.

 

[cardiffboy500]

Right CAGGERS, time for an update!!

 

I have received a letter from the ET, with an attached letter from the Respondent.

 

We would ask that there is a pre-hearing review in this case as we believe that this is a frivolous, vexatious action and that the claimant is being unreasonable in his claims.

 

We would therefore ask that this matter be reviewed at the earliest possible date as it is clear that CB500 believes he is entitled to a sum of £xxx and is trying to extort this this from my company.

 

It is completely outrageous that this matter has been allowed to proceed in the Employment Tribunal, and is a flagrant abuse of the ET process. We would ask, at the pre-hearing review, CB500 be ordered to make a deposit for the costs that this company is likely to have to pay as a result of this action being allowed to proceed.

 

Yours

 

THE RESPONDENT

 

I need to reply to this of course. I am very comfortable going to a PHR as I feel my case is very strong. However, I would like to proceed with the case. Is it going to slow down the process if we have a PHR (or indeed speed it up)? Also what can I expect to happen at the PHR - will it be a mini-version of the hearing? I understand that the possible outcomes are, the case proceeds, the case proceeds but I have to pay a deposit (is this means tested?), or the case is struck out. Is there likely to be a decision that the case is entirely valid, and therefore judgement is passed there and then?

 

Finally, and very interestingly, if you recall above, he was keen to have only YYYY Ltd listed as the respondent, an ET3 was sent to YYYY Ltd, and the deadline was last Friday for returning this, but they have not done so. It is just all a bit bizarre!!

 

Thanks, and sorry for all the questions!!

 

CB500

[Bigredbus]

Right CAGGERS, time for an update!!

 

I have received a letter from the ET, with an attached letter from the Respondent.

 

We would ask that there is a pre-hearing review in this case as we believe that this is a frivolous, vexatious action and that the claimant is being unreasonable in his claims.

 

We would therefore ask that this matter be reviewed at the earliest possible date as it is clear that CB500 believes he is entitled to a sum of £xxx and is trying to extort this this from my company.

 

It is completely outrageous that this matter has been allowed to proceed in the Employment Tribunal, and is a flagrant abuse of the ET process. We would ask, at the pre-hearing review, CB500 be ordered to make a deposit for the costs that this company is likely to have to pay as a result of this action being allowed to proceed.

 

Yours

 

THE RESPONDENT

 

I need to reply to this of course. I am very comfortable going to a PHR as I feel my case is very strong. However, I would like to proceed with the case. Is it going to slow down the process if we have a PHR (or indeed speed it up)? Also what can I expect to happen at the PHR - will it be a mini-version of the hearing? I understand that the possible outcomes are, the case proceeds, the case proceeds but I have to pay a deposit (is this means tested?), or the case is struck out. Is there likely to be a decision that the case is entirely valid, and therefore judgement is passed there and then?

 

Finally, and very interestingly, if you recall above, he was keen to have only YYYY Ltd listed as the respondent, an ET3 was sent to YYYY Ltd, and the deadline was last Friday for returning this, but they have not done so. It is just all a bit bizarre!!

 

Thanks, and sorry for all the questions!!

 

CB500

 

Hi,

 

(a) I remember one of your posts stating that the respondent intended to instruct the 'best' Welsh employment law firm or chamber... 'trying to extort this from MY company'... this seems to suggest that he is taking on the case on his own...

 

(b) The chairman would require a party to pay a deposit, not exceeding £500, if he believes that the case has little reasonable prospect of success.

 

© At a pre-hearing review (PHR), the judge may carry out a preliminary consideration of the proceedings and may:

(1) determine any interim or preliminary matter relating to the proceedings;

(2) issue any order in accordance with rule 10 (ETR 2004) or do anything else which may be done at a case management discussion;

(3) order that a deposit be paid in accordance with rule 20 (ETR 2004) without hearing evidence;

(4) consider any oral or written representations or evidence;

(5) deal with an application for interim relief made under section 161 of TULR©A or section 128 of the Employment Rights Act.

 

If a pre-hearing review is conducted and your case has a good prospect of success, your case would move forward to a full hearing.

[honeybee13]

Hi there, I'm pleased for you that things are moving along. I forget how many times I've seen 'frivolous and vexatious' on the forum, once the employer realises it's happening.

 

BRB, I thought claimants hardly ever, if ever, pay the employer's costs. Am I right?

 

HB

[cardiffboy500]

Hi,

 

(a) I remember one of your posts stating that the respondent intended to instruct the 'best' Welsh employment law firm or chamber... 'trying to extort this from MY company'... this seems to suggest that he is taking on the case on his own...

 

(b) The chairman would require a party to pay a deposit, not exceeding £500, if he believes that the case has little reasonable prospect of success.

 

 

Thank you Bigredbus and Honeybee for your comments.

 

BRB, he was indeed going to instruct the top employment firm in Wales, to defend him, but there has not been any further word of this. I guess when he turned up at their offices with his evidence they just laughed at him!!

 

CB500

[Bigredbus]

Hi,

 

All I would say is that... if he attempts to get arrogant, funny or rude during the PHR, that will be held against him 'big time' (if I may say...)

[Bigredbus]

Hi there, I'm pleased for you that things are moving along. I forget how many times I've seen 'frivolous and vexatious' on the forum, once the employer realises it's happening.

 

BRB, I thought claimants hardly ever, if ever, pay the employer's costs. Am I right?

 

HB

 

You are right, 'honeybee13'...

 

The deposit referred to in my post is (a) rarely ordered, (b) is ordered as a condition to continue and take part in the proceedings where the merit of the case is ambiguous...