Tribunal Advice Please

[CaptainMannering]

Kingofrod

 

Sorry to jump in on your thread but I'm going through exactly the same as you and have asked the same questions myself at some point. Continue with what your doing and hopefully you'll get the result you want, you have had some great advise.

In relation to the witness statement I have a question. Is this a place where I should be highlighting inaccuracies in their evidence or is that for the hearing. Example - grievance raised(example point - manager committed act of gross misconduct) manager lied(denied allegation), grievance or appeal not upheld. In disciplinary same manager when questioned submitted that he had committed act of GM, therefore lied in grievance.

Question is do I state in my witness statement: ......the manager evidently lied, as when questioned denied the allegation, when requestioned later admitted allegation. This would have had an impact on outcome of grievance and if he lied here this calls into account the whole investigation process and the reliability of his evidence. Or is this something which should be saved for the hearing, obviously if I put it in the statement they are aware of my evidence and can possibly defend against, which I can't see how they can, but if it's in the statement and they feel they can't defend against this then the chances of a settlement may be increased.

 

Thanks in advance,

[kingofrod]

Hiya K! Welcome to the thread! I've been a pest here - asking question after question, but people like Marie, Becky and Ibruk have been absolutely superb in sharing their knowledge and remaining patient.

 

I'm sure you'll get the answers you need.

 

I'll try and answer your question to give you something to work with until such time as someone more knowledgeable comes along.

 

I think that the witness statement is more about putting your point across about the allegations against you but that's not to stop you questioning, if you've previously done so, what they've said or done. I'd almost be inclined, however, to leave things like that out because the more information you put in the statement that can come up at the Tribunal in cross-examination, the more advance notice they're being given about what your line of argument will be.

 

If you leave things out that will be fully acceptable to be discussed on the day - if you're not happy with how they conducted an interview and think they failed to follow procedure, for example, raise it with them on the day instead of putting it in your statement - it will make them have to think on their feet and potentially slip up.

 

I realised this (potentially flawed) logic when writing my letter to appeal my employer's decision to uphold my dismissal at first stage of appeal. They told me I had to give them "specific reasons" for my appeal. I said "Because I find inaccuracies with [the outcome of the first hearing]". They wrote back and asked me for more information, fully specific reasons. Of course, I'd done this previously so while I went in to the hearing not knowing what THEY were going to say to me or what line of questioning they were going to follow, they knew exactly what I was going in with because I'd typed it up and sent it to them by Special Delivery.

[CaptainMannering]

To be honest I know exactly where your coming from and I'm seeing this from both sides, as with your case I really feel I've got a watertight case with great evidence and numerous instances where they have failed to follow their own and Acas COP.

I just feel that if I can prove in my statement that my case is solid and I have evidence to support my claims that there is an increased chance of them settling pre hearing, although I suspect they will anyway, but I see what your saying in regards to holding it for the hearing. I want to avoid going to hearing if possible (5 day hearing) but when all said and done if I gotta go then I will. The respondent has been unbelievably difficult, missing orders to the ET, failing to supply docs to me, sending me false docs, missing order dates for disclosing docs, the lost goes on, but I'm enjoying them racking up hours upon hours of admin time and barristers costs!!!

As people have said to you, have no worries over costs being awarded against you!!!!

[lbruk]

Your statement should contain everything that proves you case.

 

From setting 9out the atmosphere that you worked in, to specific things said. Tribunals love dates and times so get as much in there as you can. You should make sure that your statement reflects any witness statements you have, and is backed up by as much written evidence as you have.

 

You can quote some case law in it if you wish, and make sure you start with how lovely you are and how committed to the company you have been, then go into the specifics of the case. Then finish with a bang, quoting why every part of your claims and matching it to the specific incidents. Sometimes statements can become to about what happened to you and stray away from what the Judge needs to know. So make sure you finish with things like "this is unlawful discrimination because on the XX or XX YY called me a HH" things like that right at the end so it gives the judge a nice reminder of all your claims.

[kingofrod]

Good heavens, sounds like you're dealing with a right shower there, K!

 

Sadly, I wouldn't call my case watertight. I'm a realist. I recognise that I made mistakes but I also feel that the employer acted unreasonably in dismissing me. I was operating to the procedures that I had agreed to work to with two of the company's senior managers, and have evidence showing that they were doing the same, but when it came to the crunch, they pulled the rug out from under me.

 

They're right - I didn't follow official set-down procedure, but I did follow what I believed to be the correct route given the special arrangement I had in place at the time.

 

You know they say that if you don't sign a contract, you're deemed to have agreed to it regardless if you work under those terms and conditions for a period of six months? Well, if that's true (anyone?), I have to question why I cannot apply the same logic here - I'd been working under this unofficial yet fully substantiated agreement for over six months - so why can't I say it became the "right thing to do"?

 

I'm reliant on a Tribunal recognising that, for an otherwise blemishless employee with a positive and clean record, the decision to dismiss went too far. I've got evidence to support all of my claims and all they have is a lot of circumstancial stuff (I had been considering another job offer from the place I worked part time and posted so on my facebook, seeking the advice of my friends and colleagues - the respondent say this was an indication that I was leaving them anyway).

 

I feel, or would like to think, I have as good a case as the respondent - better, actually - and basically, in the end, it'll all come down to how the Tribunal chooses to interpret the evidence from both sides. Of course, they have a lot of highly paid solicitors on their side and I have me.... (and the superb advice from people here!)

[lbruk]

we all would love a water tight case, unfortunately i don't think there is one!

 

With my case the respondent has thrown me a curve ball today, and i know there will be plenty of those to come, but what is important is that you are honest, if you are not lying, and are just honest about your side of the story, then it is the tribunal to decide whether your case is in law or not, but i know that when i stand (sit) at that desk, i will tell the truth.

 

The respondent will most probably lie, be horrible, say nasty things that are not true, but at the end of the day I am telling my truth.

[CaptainMannering]

When you say they've thrown you a curve ball can you elaborate slightly?

[lbruk]

well they conceded a point, quite a major one in terms of medical evidence, but have stuck a date to it that is gonna be a trial to prove isnt correct. So they have admitted something, but again made it up to me to prove that isnt as they say.

[Browncow]

To be honest I know exactly where your coming from and I'm seeing this from both sides, as with your case I really feel I've got a watertight case with great evidence and numerous instances where they have failed to follow their own and Acas COP.

I just feel that if I can prove in my statement that my case is solid and I have evidence to support my claims that there is an increased chance of them settling pre hearing, although I suspect they will anyway, but I see what your saying in regards to holding it for the hearing. I want to avoid going to hearing if possible (5 day hearing) but when all said and done if I gotta go then I will. The respondent has been unbelievably difficult, missing orders to the ET, failing to supply docs to me, sending me false docs, missing order dates for disclosing docs, the lost goes on, but I'm enjoying them racking up hours upon hours of admin time and barristers costs!!!

As people have said to you, have no worries over costs being awarded against you!!!!

I got their witness statements and they are basic and trite. This is a clever tactic because if they do not mention something it does not get entered as evidence. Witness statements are evidence - put in everything but try not to draw conclusions - say X claims that but then he said ... quote him and reference the document in the bundle - give a chronological account of events from your perspective but without opinion - that way the Tribunal can see what happened but never forget it is up to them to decide,

[CaptainMannering]

Update on mine which may be similar to your king but I'm too surprised:

 

I wrote to the tribunal Last week and copied this directly to the respondent requesting an order for disclosure, lurking this has been requested and re requested and again since February but has still not been disclosed, therefore I requested order for disclosure.

 

The tribunal have written to the respondent (cc me) enclosing my order request from last week (which they were sent last week) and asking for their comments on my letter within 7 days.

 

There is an order to meet tomorrow (agreeing content of bundle) which I can't do as I've not had documents disclosed, and in 2 weeks the respondent has to send me a copy of the agreed bundle (I cant see how they will meet this given we haven't agreed due to their actions)

 

 

Any advise?

[CaptainMannering]

Becky - I requested docs in relation to my grievance and disciplinary, they sent a couple, didn't send most and sent one that was false, I addressed this issue 6 weeks ago but they have not responded since and so i requested an order for disclosure, guess this is common too?

[kingofrod]

I'd be inclined to meet with them to keep your end of the 'deal', but to refust to agree the bundle. Don't give them any ammo by not showing up.

 

Would you care to share when/where your tribunal is, even by PM? If you're anywhere near where mine is going to be heard, you'd be welcome to come along and see how things go (I know they're public anyway, but you know). I've not been able to get to a tribunal for some 'experience' yet and it worries me a little, but Becky and the gang here have given me some superb advice as to how things will work.

[CaptainMannering]

When you say 'meet with them' what do you mean. As the order to agree is tomorrow all I can say is " I agree to all the documents you've supplied & all the documents ive requested that I've received". I can't agree to all the key documents not supplied etc.

 

My hearing was originally July they stated that one of their key witnesses (who I need to be there to cross examine) was abroad for that hearing, it has been moved but not had a date through yet. I know yours is may but where is it held?

[kingofrod]

When you say 'meet with them' what do you mean.

My apologies. I meant meet with the timescales set out by the Tribunal.

 

Do your bit - respond to them but say that you do NOT accept that the bundle is complete/accurate and say that you're still waiting for some important information before you consider it complete.

[kingofrod]

London East - 2nd Floor Anchorage House 2 Clove Crescent London E14 2BE

Thought it would have been down in Dorset but as head office is in London they're having it there.

[honeybee13]

When you say 'meet with them' what do you mean. As the order to agree is tomorrow all I can say is " I agree to all the documents you've supplied & all the documents ive requested that I've received". I can't agree to all the key documents not supplied etc.

 

My hearing was originally July they stated that one of their key witnesses (who I need to be there to cross examine) was abroad for that hearing, it has been moved but not had a date through yet. I know yours is may but where is it held?

 

Hello there.

 

I know you're new and just wanted to mention that this thread is about kingofrod's problems. If you have queries specific to your case, it's best to put them on your own thread please.

 

My best, HB

[CaptainMannering]

My apologies. I meant meet with the timescales set out by the Tribunal.

 

Do your bit - respond to them but say that you do NOT accept that the bundle is complete/accurate and say that you're still waiting for some important information before you consider it complete.

 

Can I do this, I guess to comply with the orders I have to but not sure how they will respond?

[CaptainMannering]

Hello there.

 

I know you're new and just wanted to mention that this thread is about kingofrod's problems. If you have queries specific to your case, it's best to put them on your own thread please.

 

My best, HB

 

Hi HB I fully accept your point and I'm not trying to jump in on kinds thread but he's built up a similar thread with great responses and some great advise.

 

I feel Ive got advise to offer king as well as take some from him and the questions I'm raising may well be pertinent to his case as well as mine.

 

Best regards

[CaptainMannering]

London East - 2nd Floor Anchorage House 2 Clove Crescent London E14 2BE

Thought it would have been down in Dorset but as head office is in London they're having it there.

 

Bit too far for me from midlands unfortunately but it would have been a good experience!!!

[CaptainMannering]

Can I do this, I guess to comply with the orders I have to but not sure how they will respond?

 

Is this what you did king/ or would do?

[kingofrod]

I wouldn't agree to the bundle if I didn't feel it had all the documentation in it I needed or felt was appropriate. I'd write back to the Tribunal asking that they reconsider issuing the order, highlighting the time constraints you're facing and pointing out how long you've been trying to get the documentation for. Include some previous correspondence between yourself and the respondent in which you've asked for the documentation and they've said it's coming. Show that you've been patient but have yet to be given what you've reasonably requested.

Edited April 25, 2012 by kingofrod

[CaptainMannering]

Hi king. To be fair this is exactly what my letter to the ET outlined but as I say they've wrote to the respondent asking for their comments on my letter rather than issuing an order, I can only guess this is normal but however given the order constraints issued by the ET this doesnt help in my favour. Given the fact they have 7 days to respond, it'll be a further week before I get the response from the ET then the bundle order to supply to me will have passed. Not sure what happens here?

 

Think I'll mail the res tomorrow on the order date as you say and agree to currently agreed contents but unable to agree to final content due to res not complying with orders?

[kingofrod]

Well yeah, when I exchanged my witness statements there was a caveat attached that I could change mine (and the respondent could change theirs) when the documentation I'm waiting for was given to me.

 

This was after delaying the exchange twice to wait for the documentation. I'm still waiting for the documentation I asked for which is why I've requested an SDO.

 

so I'd certainly explore the possibility of attaching a caveat to the finalisation of the bundle. Remember to copy in the Tribunal on the email/letter so they can see that you're making the effort to get what you need and stick, as far as possible, to the timescales.

[CaptainMannering]

The thing that annoys me king and I'm sure you are the same, the orders have been set, it's the res that hasn't adhered to them and the claimant suffers, I was led to believe there were severe consequences with not complying with orders which is what they clearly are not doing???

[kingofrod]

Remind me, are you representing yourself?