Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I see, shame, I think if a claim is 'someone was served' then proof of that should be mandatory. Appreciate your input into the WS whenever you get chance, thanks in advance
    • Paper trail off the original creditor often confirms the default and issue of a notice...not having or being able to disclose the actual copy or being able to produce a copy less so. Creditors are not compelled to keep copies of the actual default notice so you will in most cases get a reconstituted version but must contain accurate figures/dates/format.     .    
    • Including Default Notice Andy? Ok, I think this is the best I can do.. it all makes sense with references to their WS. They have included exhibits that dates don't match the WS about them, small but still.. if you're going to reference letters giving dates, then the exhibits should be correct, no? I know I redacted them too much, but one of the dates differs to the WS by a few months. IN THE ******** County Court Claim No. [***] BETWEEN: LC Asset 2 S.A.R.L CLAIMANT AND [***] DEFENDANT ************ _________________________ ________ WITNESS STATEMENT OF [***] _________________________ ________ I, [***], being the Defendant in this case will state as follows; I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in this claim. 1. I understand that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much-reduced cost to the amount claimed and which the original creditors have already written off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income as confirmed in the claimant’s witness statement exhibit by way of the Deed of Assignment. As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights. This means that when an assignee purchases debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information). The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party. 2. The Claim relates to an alleged Credit Card agreement between the Defendant and Bank of Scotland plc. Save insofar of any admittance it is accepted that the Defendant has had contractual agreements with Bank of Scotland plc in the past, the Defendant is unaware as to what alleged debt the Claimant refers. 3. The Defendant requested a copy of the CCA on the 24/12/2022 along with the standard fee of £1.00 postal order, to which the defendant received a reply from the Claimant dated 06/02/2023. To this date, the Claimant has failed to disclose a valid agreement and proof as per their claim that this is enforceable, that Default Notice and Notice of Assignment were sent to and received by the Defendant, on which their claim relies. The Claimant is put to strict proof to verify and confirm that the exhibit *** is a true copy of the agreement and are the true Terms and Conditions as issued at the time of inception of the online application and execution of the agreement. 4. Point 3 is noted. The Claimant pleads that a default notice has been served upon the defendant as evidenced by Exhibit [***]. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 5. Point 6 is noted and disputed. The Defendant cannot recall ever having received the notice of assignment as evidenced in the exhibit marked ***. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 6. Point 11 is noted and disputed. See 3. 7. Point 12 is noted, the Defendant doesn’t recall receiving contact where documentation is provided as per the Claimants obligations under CCA. In addition, the Claimant pleads letters were sent on dates given, yet those are not the letters evidenced in their exhibits *** 8. Point 13 is noted and denied. Claimant is put to strict proof to prove allegations. 9. The Claimant did not provide a true copy of the CCA in response to the Defendants request of 24/12/2022. The Claimant further claims that the documents are sufficient to pursue a Judgement and are therefore copies of original documents in their possession. Conclusion 10. Without the Claimant providing a valid true copy of the executed Credit agreement that complies with the CCA, the Claimant has no grounds on which to enforce this alleged debt. 11. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. On receipt of this claim I could not recall the precise details of the agreement or any debt and sought clarity from the claimant by way of a Section 78 request. The Claimant failed to comply. I can only assume as this was due to the Claimant not having any enforceable documentation and issuing a claim in hope of an undefended default judgment.   Statement of Truth I, ********, the Defendant, believe the facts stated within this Witness Statement to be true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in it’s truth. Signed: _________________________ _______ Dated: _____________________
    • AMEX and TSB the 2 Creditors who you need to worry about the least, ever!  Just stop paying them and forget about it, ignore all their threat o gram letters.  Only if, and with these 2 it's a massive if, you end up with a claim form you need to respond, and there will be plenty of help here.
    • No, nothing from Barclays. Turns out i have 2 accounts on here, and i posted originally on the other one. Sorry about that.  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Disability Discrimination


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4308 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

Yes I agree, in the report my psychiatrist sent to the tribunal and respondent he put it that I had reported symptoms since September 2010 and stated that it could have been sooner.

I am not a legal professional or adviser, I am however a Law Student and very well versed areas of Employment Law. Anything I write here is purely from my own experiences! If I help, then click the star to add to my reputation :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 84
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Yes I agree, in the report my psychiatrist sent to the tribunal and respondent he put it that I had reported symptoms since September 2010 and stated that it could have been sooner.

Your impact statement with your psychiatrist report should be sufficient. It is very difficult to say when a disability starts you cannot wake up one morning say I have a disability!! But the tribunal would be able to determine this for you. Are you getting any sort disability benefit such as DLA have you applied for it, I am sure you would be eligible for it and why not make enquiries about it. Get in contact with MIND

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a member if mind, have been for a while. I left that job in July 2011, and have a very good full time job now, I don't believe benefits are necessary, but thanks.

 

I guess you are right, let's just see what the tribunal say then :-)

I am not a legal professional or adviser, I am however a Law Student and very well versed areas of Employment Law. Anything I write here is purely from my own experiences! If I help, then click the star to add to my reputation :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are sort of correct, yes.

 

The Tribunal has the ultimate power once proceedings have been issued, if the issue of disability is contested by the respondent, to rule whether the claimant is disabled or not. That's to determine legal disability, and thus whether the ET has jurisdiction to hear a claim. The legal burden of proof is squarely on the claimant to prove they are disabled, which is why disability is often disputed as a tactical point.

 

Pre litigation, it's somewhat different. You wouldn't, for example, ask a judge to rule as to whether an employee is disabled before deciding whether reasonable adjustments ought to be implemented. If an employee makes you aware that they are disabled, that's when the obligation potentially arises and when the employer is deemed to have constructive knowledge of the employees disability. Of course, an employer could still argue that an employee wasn't disabled, at which point the employee would undoubtedly claim constructive dismissal, disability discrimination and/or a failure to make reasonable adjustments, at which point it would be referred back to the ET to determine whether the claimant is disabled...

 

In practical terms, employers are better off treating an employee as disabled to err on the side of caution and help avoid legal liability.

 

Therefore if employer says there is no disability then my aunt could resign and claim constructive dismissal and it is only then that it can be referred back to the tribunal to determine whether there is a disability.

 

Is this correct Becky.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Therefore if employer says there is no disability then my aunt could resign and claim constructive dismissal and it is only then that it can be referred back to the tribunal to determine whether there is a disability.

 

Is this correct Becky.

 

She should never resign. That is a bad tactical move (although I appreciate she probably is looking to get away from these people). She should put in a grievance and wait to see if the employer enacts a "detriment" against her for putting in the grievance. If they do a detriment that could be viewed as victimisation. Constructive dismissal would not be easy to prove.

Link to post
Share on other sites

resigning makes things difficult for you (i resigned and am claiming constructive dismissal, its a bit of a long shot in my case and not forming a massive amount of effort by me to prove) while you work there you still have all the rights as an employee.

I am not a legal professional or adviser, I am however a Law Student and very well versed areas of Employment Law. Anything I write here is purely from my own experiences! If I help, then click the star to add to my reputation :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

She should never resign. That is a bad tactical move (although I appreciate she probably is looking to get away from these people). She should put in a grievance and wait to see if the employer enacts a "detriment" against her for putting in the grievance. If they do a detriment that could be viewed as victimisation. Constructive dismissal would not be easy to prove.

Her problem is that she cannot go back to work without adjustments and if the employer says she had not got a disability what happens then. If they put adjustments which they think is adequate for her they will work there for so difficult for her that she will end up leaving anyway. I think she would prefer to do this rather than let the employer do the sacking.

 

resigning makes things difficult for you (i resigned and am claiming constructive dismissal, its a bit of a long shot in my case and not forming a massive amount of effort by me to prove) while you work there you still have all the rights as an employee.

She may have to leave if her firm do not make reasonable adjustments for her, the company is well known for saying yes they will make adjustments but in practice this does not happen.

 

This has been a very distressful time for her and is taking its toll on her health.

Link to post
Share on other sites

well file the grievance now! if you do not get the result you want then you are in a far stronger position to resign.

I am not a legal professional or adviser, I am however a Law Student and very well versed areas of Employment Law. Anything I write here is purely from my own experiences! If I help, then click the star to add to my reputation :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

well file the grievance now! if you do not get the result you want then you are in a far stronger position to resign.

 

Grievane has been filed before but was no used things got worse for her, she will know soon enough regarding what employer says about her disability. Hopefuuly that will be soon. She is off work at present and will not retune until they put adjustments in placce for her and it has ot be in writing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In addition to this, I need to work out what the correct comparator for the following direct discrimination.

This is taken directly for my Schedule of Issues:

 

 

3) Has the Claimant been subjected to less favourable treatment (direct discrimination) because of a disability contrary to Section 13(1) of the Equality Act 2010 in respect of the following allegations:

 

a. Instigating disciplinary/performance proceedings? and/or

b. Failure to investigate the claimants crying and upset demeanour in store and in disciplinary interviews in November 2010 and March 2011?

c. Ignoring signs of the illness in the claimant?

d. The Respondent’s refusal to exercise its discretion in favour of the Claimant to pay sick pay?

 

So i am looking for the correct comparators to put into my statement. Any advice would be appreciated :)

I am not a legal professional or adviser, I am however a Law Student and very well versed areas of Employment Law. Anything I write here is purely from my own experiences! If I help, then click the star to add to my reputation :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok, so letter from the respondents solicitor today, they have conceded that i am disabled under the Equality Act (hurrah!) but they have given the specific date of April 7 2011 (boo) but a concession on their side is good. just need to haggle on the old date now!

I am not a legal professional or adviser, I am however a Law Student and very well versed areas of Employment Law. Anything I write here is purely from my own experiences! If I help, then click the star to add to my reputation :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok, so letter from the respondents solicitor today, they have conceded that i am disabled under the Equality Act (hurrah!) but they have given the specific date of April 7 2011 (boo) but a concession on their side is good. just need to haggle on the old date now!

 

1bruk, it is good that they have conceded, just keep going and haggle their date, will it make a big difference to your claim if they do not change the date for you.

 

My aunt should know soon about her employer decision, but she not holding up much hope knowing how they have been with her.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that although your weekly hours may be doubled over a period of time without set hours there isnt any employment law to cover it and you had signed to say the WTD didnt apply. Some weeks I can work 50-60 hours others a lot less but i dont get paid extra for the longer hours, neither do I get penalised for the shorter ones, its down to the demands of the job at any particular time.

As I said before very common some companies might let you have some extra time off at quiter periods to compensate but they dont have to. I dont think there is anything that you can do about this.

If I have been of any help, please click on my star and let me know, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah i did the same, i'm just looking into this, as the person that mentioned it is studying HR and just got onto this topic. I'll wait still she has read a bit more!

I am not a legal professional or adviser, I am however a Law Student and very well versed areas of Employment Law. Anything I write here is purely from my own experiences! If I help, then click the star to add to my reputation :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey,

 

Does anyone know what an employer is in breach of, if anything, if they fail to investigate an obvious illness? This illness then becomes a disability under the Equality act, and they still do not investigate.

I am not a legal professional or adviser, I am however a Law Student and very well versed areas of Employment Law. Anything I write here is purely from my own experiences! If I help, then click the star to add to my reputation :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi - I'm no expert but I think it would come under Failure in "Duty of Care"

 

Try ...

Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974.

Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks :)

I am not a legal professional or adviser, I am however a Law Student and very well versed areas of Employment Law. Anything I write here is purely from my own experiences! If I help, then click the star to add to my reputation :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is not enough information to make a judgement. Medical information is personal and employers don't have any right to enquire into ones health. There have been discussions on here that basically stated that being ill is no defence to not turning up for work ie so what if you have the flu / heart condition / need to take medication you are under contract to work... work !

 

However if the illness has progressed to becoming a disability and you tell the employer that you need some sort of 'reasonable adjustment' and it can be done easily then the law provides a level of support and protection for the disabled person.

 

I fear that the Health and Safety legislation is more concerned with providing a safe environment to work in rather than placing any responsiblity on the employer to ensure an illness is investigated...... unless the employer's work environment has caused the illness... that's a different ball game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Does anyone know what the interest rate for discrimination is for tribunal schedule of loss?

 

thanks

I am not a legal professional or adviser, I am however a Law Student and very well versed areas of Employment Law. Anything I write here is purely from my own experiences! If I help, then click the star to add to my reputation :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok, thanks becky

I am not a legal professional or adviser, I am however a Law Student and very well versed areas of Employment Law. Anything I write here is purely from my own experiences! If I help, then click the star to add to my reputation :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi all,

 

I was wondering if anyone knew if there is a statutory time limit for an appeals process to be carried out.

 

This doesn't relate to a disciplinary procedure, but to the non-payment of sick pay - the decision was to not pay sick pay, however this was appealed, is there a standard time limit for processing and replying to an appeal like this?

 

thanks

I am not a legal professional or adviser, I am however a Law Student and very well versed areas of Employment Law. Anything I write here is purely from my own experiences! If I help, then click the star to add to my reputation :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hiya

 

Ask HR for the documentation policies/procedures covering pay.

 

If there is nothing in what you get - and do it by email & BCC [blind copy] yourself at home so you have a record - I think they will have a little problem as there should be.

 

Good Luck

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

My case just gets funnier and funnier really. In June 2011 i requested information under a SAR to my employer. I received some in August, i wrote to them again saying bits were missing, i received more. I reported them to the ICO, they were found in breach of the DPA. I wrote again to the respondent and they sent more documents and a nice letter saying that they had done a thorough search and that really was EVERYTHING.

 

Guess what!? In the bundle for my tribunal there are about 20 documents and handwritten notes that were withheld from me! Brilliant, I think. Problem is i have no idea what to do with these documents now! I phoned the ICO and they were like "we cant do anything unless there is a complaint" which is fair enough, so now i need a complaint! Its not anything completely devastating to my case, in fact some are quite handy for me.

 

I have written a letter to their solicitor asking for some more documents to be added, and also a nice line about this complete balls up by them. But not sure what to do with anything else, I havent really incurred any losses bar my time, ink and paper to write to them and the ICO so small claims is kinda out the window. Any suggestions?

I am not a legal professional or adviser, I am however a Law Student and very well versed areas of Employment Law. Anything I write here is purely from my own experiences! If I help, then click the star to add to my reputation :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Ibruk,

 

You are in the middle of an ET claim. Correct?

 

I have just submitted an appeal to the EAT today, do you know if i have the right to write to the company under the freedom of information act and ask for full disclosure of everything pertaining to me. Could this interfere with my EAT claim? I also would like to write to the company as confidential information of mine was openly passed around the company without my consent!

 

Thanks

 

BB

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...