Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Here's something I'm hoping to clarify before I get in trouble for it:   There is a street close to where I live that was transformed into a temporary Pedestrian and Cycle Zone due to a school that's there. I know I can't enter it during those times, but can I be fined for having my car parked on that street while the zone is active? So far I have only heard one interpretation, from my neighbour, who said you can have your car parked there and you can exit the zone while it is operational, oddly enough, but before I take her word for it I want to get some more opinions on the matter.   For reference, here is what the Council's own website states: "It is an offence to enter or drive in an active school Street without a valid school street permit." (emphasis mine) Would this prove my neighbour right or can they still find a different interpretation to it that would carry the risk of a fine if I park my car there?   The sign for the zone is very similar to the image attached below, only different operating times.      
    • good i can see where you got that from  pers i'd put back, suitable adapted the line:   3.Throughout this period XXX only ever served estimated bills which were grossly over estimated with values unrelated to actual use. There was and still remains an unresolved dispute with XXX which was never resolved prior to the assignment of the alleged debt.
    • Hi Mr S,   Read other threads here posted over the last year or so.   We pretty much advise the same thing - ignore demands from the gym, their admin company, any DCA they use and any legal firm they use.   No need to engage with the gym or admin company to discuss or argue your wish to cancel - it'll get you nowhere.   If you want to leave the gym now, just give a month's written notice then cancel the DD m,andate .   If you want to cancel from October 2021, confirm this to the gym in writing early October, allow the final DD to be taken in October, then cancel the DD mandate.   You'll see from other threads that no action is taken to claim money and gym m/ships do not affect your credit records.
    • Update on the situation:   Following the run in with the police he has actually gone to the police station himself to question what he was told and was told there is no issue with him idling or moving the car around the car park, so the police officers who told him that were wrong.   As a side note, he knows who it is that's reporting him. Seems to be a bit of a feud between them, but the clarification he got from the police should at least stop them coming around every time a report is made.   Thank you to everyone who replied to this question!
    • I have had another good look around but still struggled to find any templates. I did find a defence on a thread that I have adapted below. I would greatly appreciate some input before I file it. Again, many thanks in advance.   Defence   1. I the Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.   2. It is admitted that I have had a supply and service agreement with Co-operative Energy in the past. During the period, Co-operative Energy actively blocked me from hanging to a cheaper tariff or switching provider as there was an outstanding balance on the account.   3. Throughout this period Co-operative Energy served estimated bills. This is shown in the one copy of a bill that the claimant has been able to provide. The claimant has given no details as to the full breakdown of their claim and what dates it relates to, so I am unable to defend specifically until the claimant can particularise and quantify its pleadings.   4. Pursuant to OFGEM code of back billing rules the alleged charges are now over 12 months old and relate to charges which have not been billed correctly by Co-operative Energy and are therefore prevented from charging.   5. The claimant does not have access to the agreement nor was the Assignor required to retain a copy. Therefore their claim is unsubstantiated.   Pursuant to the civil procedure rules Practice Direction 16 (7.3) Where a claim is based upon a written agreement.   1) a copy of the contract or documents constituting the agreement,  the original(s) should be available at the hearing along with a complete breakdown of how the charges accrued by date and amount.   With the court’s permission the Claimant is put to strict proof to: -   a) show and disclose how the Defendant has entered into an agreement. b) show and disclose how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed. c) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.   6. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5 (4) it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.   7. It is therefore denied that the defendant is indebted to the claimant as alleged or at all.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • Ebay Packlink and Hermes - destroyed item as it was "damaged". https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/430396-ebay-packlink-and-hermes-destroyed-item-as-it-was-damaged/&do=findComment&comment=5087347
      • 32 replies
    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
  • Recommended Topics

  • Recommended Topics

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3626 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

This isn't required - or, frankly, wanted! The point of the ET1 and ET3 are not to argue the case - that is what the tribunal is for. You only amend if you are adding to the claim. You now get on and prepare for your case to be heard. At some point in the dim and distant future!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am a barrister specialising in employment law, and only represent employees. My advice on employment issues is advice - not legal opinion - and is based only on the facts you provide. If you want an accurate assessment of your case and prospects, you should get legal opinion from a lawyer - not a public forum. Anything I tell you is for guidance only, and is based on my experience of the law in the context of what details you provide.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

unless there was some form of unlawful discriomination you cannot claim victimisation

 

Can you please elaborate?

 

I was always under the impression that victimisation was an entirely seperate claim in addition to the usual ud/discrim etc...and something you could claim in a situation where you had raised a greviance or complaint, and were then subsequently victimised as a result?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Can you please elaborate?

 

I was always under the impression that victimisation was an entirely seperate claim in addition to the usual ud/discrim etc...and something you could claim in a situation where you had raised a greviance or complaint, and were then subsequently victimised as a result?

 

The word “victimisation” has a specific meaning in law. Victimisation occurs when a person is treated with detriment because s/he has made an allegation of unlawful discrimination against his or her employer, made an allegation that amounts to one of discrimination, or supported or given evidence in such an allegation made by another person. It has no application in any other circumstance. Detrimental actions (which the world may class as victimisation or harassment - but not the law) MAY be cause to claim UD or CUD - but they do not constitute claims in their own right. I am surprised that you didn't realise this - I though you worked in law? But I may have misunderstood.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am a barrister specialising in employment law, and only represent employees. My advice on employment issues is advice - not legal opinion - and is based only on the facts you provide. If you want an accurate assessment of your case and prospects, you should get legal opinion from a lawyer - not a public forum. Anything I tell you is for guidance only, and is based on my experience of the law in the context of what details you provide.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Link to post
Share on other sites
All is good. That was my understanding of it, we are basically saying the same thing.

 

Ah. I see. It was a test ?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am a barrister specialising in employment law, and only represent employees. My advice on employment issues is advice - not legal opinion - and is based only on the facts you provide. If you want an accurate assessment of your case and prospects, you should get legal opinion from a lawyer - not a public forum. Anything I tell you is for guidance only, and is based on my experience of the law in the context of what details you provide.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

Just ploughing through all the paperwork involved in my wife's case.

On reading the company policy on disciplinary and appeals it states that "We will comply with the minimum statutory disciplinary procedures."

I believe this refers to the old statute,repealed in 2009?

If so, are they still bound to follow the old statutory process, (because they have it written into their policies) or can they ignore it?

 

I understand that the old statute can't actually be used as a tool, but is it still worth pursuing transgressions at a tribunal, as it forms part of their policy?

 

Thanks for any further advice,

Nick.

I have squandered my resistance for a pocket full of mumbles, such are promises.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, somebody doesn't update? It isn't relevant. The Stat. procedure was replaced by ACAS guidelines (on their site) and these are pretty much the same thing. In almost all cases (small employers being a possible exception) the tribunals use these as minimum standards, and any employer who doesn't meet them would be in some trouble.

 

I notice "wifey's" name has changed - been clattered around the head have we???:evil:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am a barrister specialising in employment law, and only represent employees. My advice on employment issues is advice - not legal opinion - and is based only on the facts you provide. If you want an accurate assessment of your case and prospects, you should get legal opinion from a lawyer - not a public forum. Anything I tell you is for guidance only, and is based on my experience of the law in the context of what details you provide.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi SarEl,

 

Well, the wife's just received an order for disclosure in preparation for the bundle.

 

I've had a look around the web, but aren't sure about the "nuts and bolts" of this part of the process.

 

Do we just wait and see what the respondent sends to us?

Or, should we be making specific requests for documents?

 

We're pretty sure that there are specific things we want that won't be sent

The respondent has denied their relevance all through my Wife's dismissal process.

 

Is it correct that this disclosure part is open ended? (There's a deadline date in the Judge's letter.)

 

It looks like she's been asked for a schedule of loss.

Is there anything else she should be sending the Respondent?

I've seen mention about mitigation evidence, job applications, etc.

 

Also, the parties have been asked to agree and prepare a bundle.

Who normally does this?

 

(I may have more questions later.):|

 

Thanks,

Nick.

I have squandered my resistance for a pocket full of mumbles, such are promises.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What - that fast? Nay, surely not? Who asked? Jeez, you are months off getting a date for tribunal I guess, and having not even had a CMD - so who the hell is doing a bundle riight now? You must live in the area (and I have no idea where it is - please tell me!) with the shortest backlog in the country if it happened this fast!

 

But you ask for the doument you want disclosing. They will them argue why you can't have them. By this time you should have caught up with the backlog! They cabn't decline something (although they will try!) because they say it isn't relevant. It's up to the tribunal to decide what is and isn't relevent.

 

Disclosure isn't open ended - there will be a deadline. But you probably aren't there yet.

 

Who asked for schedule of loss? This seems very premature.

 

Oh dear - lots of typos. I can't type, it's late, and I can't be bothered changing them - you know what I mean!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am a barrister specialising in employment law, and only represent employees. My advice on employment issues is advice - not legal opinion - and is based only on the facts you provide. If you want an accurate assessment of your case and prospects, you should get legal opinion from a lawyer - not a public forum. Anything I tell you is for guidance only, and is based on my experience of the law in the context of what details you provide.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Link to post
Share on other sites

If it's Leeds - definitely not that fast! Its's one of my local offices! And unless I woke up in an alternate reality - 9 months backlog!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am a barrister specialising in employment law, and only represent employees. My advice on employment issues is advice - not legal opinion - and is based only on the facts you provide. If you want an accurate assessment of your case and prospects, you should get legal opinion from a lawyer - not a public forum. Anything I tell you is for guidance only, and is based on my experience of the law in the context of what details you provide.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi SarEl,

Just another quick message before getting ready for work.

 

Yes, it's definitely Leeds.

Welcome... to the Twilight Zone! :???:

 

Are you a "Wessy" then?

We're about an hour East of Leeds.

 

 

Disclosures by mid March, bundle to include compensation award claim details (schedule of loss?).

Witness statements by early April, notice of hearing in due course.

 

All ordered by the Judge.

 

So, we get to see (eventually), what we ask for, then decide what we want in the bundle?

 

The judge has tried to nip the "relevancy" issue in the bud.

Anything in dispute should be included and relevancy decided by the Tribunal.

 

 

Any pointers on what we should disclose?

 

We've got prepared notes which my wife was intending to use at her disciplinary and appeal hearings, (she wasn't allowed to refer to them at the meetings).

We could also provide evidence of job hunting.

 

That's all for now.

 

Catch you later,

Nick.

I have squandered my resistance for a pocket full of mumbles, such are promises.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi SarEl,

Just another quick message before getting ready for work.

 

Yes, it's definitely Leeds.

Welcome... to the Twilight Zone! :???:

 

Are you a "Wessy" then?

We're about an hour East of Leeds.

 

 

Disclosures by mid March, bundle to include compensation award claim details (schedule of loss?).

Witness statements by early April, notice of hearing in due course.

 

All ordered by the Judge.

 

So, we get to see (eventually), what we ask for, then decide what we want in the bundle?

 

The judge has tried to nip the "relevancy" issue in the bud.

Anything in dispute should be included and relevancy decided by the Tribunal.

 

 

Any pointers on what we should disclose?

 

We've got prepared notes which my wife was intending to use at her disciplinary and appeal hearings, (she wasn't allowed to refer to them at the meetings).

We could also provide evidence of job hunting.

 

That's all for now.

 

Catch you later,

Nick.

 

That pretty much covers everything. You disclose anything that you intend to rely on in evidence - and then anything the employer asks for (which isn't often the case that there is anything else). You don't need to provide evidence of job hunting yet - that is only relevant to the tribunal if you win. But do make sure that you keep it all.

 

I feel much better now - "in due course" will be the clincher. That's where the delay will happen!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am a barrister specialising in employment law, and only represent employees. My advice on employment issues is advice - not legal opinion - and is based only on the facts you provide. If you want an accurate assessment of your case and prospects, you should get legal opinion from a lawyer - not a public forum. Anything I tell you is for guidance only, and is based on my experience of the law in the context of what details you provide.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Link to post
Share on other sites
I feel much better now - "in due course" will be the clincher. That's where the delay will happen!

 

So glad I've put your mind at ease.. Go and have a coffee to calm the nerves.

I have squandered my resistance for a pocket full of mumbles, such are promises.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

Well,

 

The case was heard on Friday... and we lost :sad:.

 

Gutted!

 

The Judge wasn't really interested in a number of (we thought) significant procedural issues.

 

The original allegation of my wife swearing in front of customers was made by a team leader.

There was documented history of problems my wife was having with this team leader.

 

The bottom line was that there was a statement from a witness supporting her version of events.

 

So, we not only had to show that the witness was lying (very difficult), but we also had to show that the dismissing officer also believed he was lying. (Nigh on impossible.)

 

Thanks for all the help from all on the board.

 

One more final question...

 

Now that this case has now been heard in a public court, I presume it is now in the public domain.

 

Would I now be able to put up a website about this?

 

My wife does keep in touch with some workers there and has been told that the "supporting witness" has let it be known generally (young idiot) that he lied about being a witness in exchange for promised privileges at work.

 

My main aim would be to let the other employees know the actual reason for the judgment and allow them all to draw their own conclusions, knowing what they now know about the supporting witness.

 

I am an internet marketer and also have the knowledge and ability to promote a website to a large audience, which would also give me some degree of satisfaction.

 

Thanks all once again.

 

Nick.

I have squandered my resistance for a pocket full of mumbles, such are promises.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...