Harassment by former Employers

[Archie023]

Hi, I am new to this site, but am looking for assistance please? Some 4 years ago I resigned from a well paid position due to sexual harassment/bullying by a line manager. There was no formal investigation on my allegations, and I was offered a transfer for approximately 2 weeks then I was informed that I was going to be placed back to work with the person whom I had made the complaint about. I was off sick for approximately 6 months prior to resigning with work related stress/anxiety/depression. I instigated Tribunal proceedings which took some 2 years to get to a full Tribunal Hearing, on the morning of the Hearing the Respondents handed me a rather large bundle of documents which were Authorities, however I lost the plot and withdrew my claim against them. At the time I was unaware of Resjudicata, and the Barrister applied for dismissal on consent. Sorry one very important issue that I have omitted to mention was during the months prior to the Hearing, I asked the Tribunal if I could ammend my claim to include a further instance of harassment. As the person whom had been harassing me was transferred to my home town to work (a Police Officer), I advised the Tribunal that I could not frequent the local shopping area, or walk up the main high street for fear of meeting the individual. The Judge granted that it was a further instance of harassment. This same person was transferred due to sickness or or around a month or so after the tribunal hearing. However, 2 weeks ago, seemingly so he is back in the area, I have had to attend the GP's to get medication, and the GP has advised this is a major set back in my condition, as I also suffer with PTSD caused by the same individual. Also, given that it has taken me almost 4 years to regain my good health, and furthermore I was in the process of starting up my own business. Can anyone advise please on what I could possibly do regarding this situation. I know I have a good chance under the PHA 97, however they would use Section 3 as a defence, however due to the background would that apply. Thanks for any assistance you can give.

[RachelMD]

PHA isn't something I know anything about, and I doubt many others would either.

I'd suggest going to a solicitor, who can give you expert advice. Sorry I can't be more helpful.

[papasmurf1cx]

Has this individual started harrassing you again? Surely if the original case has now become history you need new evidence of harrassment? Was there any compromise agreement made at the end of the first case, if so what did it say?

[Archie023]

Thank you for your posts. Firstly I agree this would be a new action, and the evidence of harassment is evident is as much as I have seen the individual on 3 occasions hence why my health has deteriorated once more. I also am afraid to leave my home just in case I further have sight of him. No there was no compromise agreement from the Tribunal Hearing, I just withdrew my claim, as I basically could not hold things together on the morning of the Hearing. Hope this helps, thank you also.

[Bigredbus]

Did the individual in question attempted to approach you, or tried to intimidate you, or harrass you?

 

What are you trying to achieve here? (Sorry for this question!)

[Archie023]

Thank you all I wish to know is:-

 

1. A defence for harassment under the PHA97 is as follows:-

 

(3) Subsection (1) does not apply to a course of conduct if the person who pursued it shows -

(a) that it was pursued for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime.

 

2. A Police Force would use the above section as a defence to stationing the officer at the location.

3. Given that there were previous proceedings etc., and that I resigned due to this individual, would I be able to use this in conjunction with the PHA 97 to claim ongoing harassment.

 

Many thanks

[papasmurf1cx]

Archie for the employer to use this defence there must be an action to defend!! Please tell us what overt action this person has done to make to feel this way. It is not enough to merely see the person. Your own insecurity is yours, in order that the law is applied that person has to do something to make you feel that way. What overt action has he taken?

[Archie023]

Thank you once again for your responses but as far as I am aware the following applies:-

The Protection From Harassment Act 1997

 

Under this Act it becomes a criminal offence if you:

 

• Cause alarm, harassment or distress more than once as a result of an action you conduct against another person. The conduct might be verbal or non-verbal and it doesn’t have to be the same type of action on each occasion – if the person feels alarmed, harassed or distressed by your actions, then it is deemed harassment, even if that was not your intention.
  

There is no stipulation as regards there having to have verbal conduct, only that the actions cause distress to the person. Or might I be reading this incorrectly?

 

Thanks

[papasmurf1cx]

Yes but you have missed the salient point here. The word CAUSE so back to the original questions... what has the person done to 'cause' the distress you have said has occurred? Cause means taking some action, merely walking about the street as a police officer is never likely to be sufficient.

[Bigredbus]

Hi,

 

You will not be able to seek an injunction if that person has not deliberately attempted to approach you or act in any direct offensive way...

[Conniff]

I have to agree with the post that say 'what reason' are you saying he is now harrasing you. Being in the same town, street or shopping center is not harrasment unless he is aware of you and is deliberately placing himself in a position knowingly and with the intention of harrasement.

 

I would also suggest that as you say no formal investigation was carried out and the tribunal was not concluded, at this present time you are unable to show that anyone has done anything.

[madari]

Hi,

As have previously stated on these posts that the criteria to succeed under the protection from harrasment act [PHA] was set out by the court of appeal in the Judgement of:

 

Conn v Sunderland city council EWCA civ 1492 [2007].

 

I suggest you google the above case to see where you stand.

 

Good luck

[MARTIN3030]

2 posts unapproved.

It is disappointing to see the personal attacks,which are neither in the spirit of the CAG,nor in compliance with site posting rules.

Please show some respect.

 

Whilst the poster of his own thread is entitled to ask other members who are responding to refrain from further posting,there is a diplomatic and proper way of doing that without offensive comments.

Lets not see any repeats of this.

 

Thanks for understanding.

[phoenix11]

Perhaps, depending on the circumstances of the consideration, if the Judge at the tribunal granted that the transfer of the individual in question was clearly a further instance of harassment, then for that individual to be re-assigned to the area, the act of 'further instance of harassment' must still stand.

 

If the individual was re-transferred to another area following the decision that the transfer to the OPs area was further harassment, then it begs the question as to why the Authority have gone against that decision by the judge and allowed the individual to transfer back.

 

I'd say that this really would be better discussed with a solicitor, or someone who can help perhaps with a complaint to the PCA (before they all get disbanded under Govt cuts!!!).

 

The big question is who took the decision that it was ok to send the individual back to the OPs area, how was it justified under the circumstances considering that it had already been identified as further harassment, and if an error or neglect has occured, what are the OPs rights to have this matter resolved to ensure they can their rights to living without fear of harassment?