Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • ae - i have no funds to appoint lawyers.   My point about most caggers getting lost is simply due to so many layers of legal issues that is bound to confuse.  
    • Lenders have a legal obligation to sell the property for the best price they can get. If they feel the offer is low they won't sell it, because it's likely the borrower will say the same.   Yes.  But every interested buyer was offering within a range - based on local market sales evidence.  Shelter site says a lender is not allowed to wait for the market to improve. Why serve a dilapidations notice? If it's in the terms of the lease to maintain the property to a good standard, then serve an S146 notice instead as it's a clear breach of the lease.   The dilapidations notice was a legal first step.  Freeholders have to give time to leaseholders to remedy.  Lender lawyers advised the property was going to be sold and the new buyer would undertake the work.  Their missive came shortly before contracts were given to buyer.  The buyer lawyer and freehold lawyers were then in contact.  The issue of dilapidations remedy was discussed..  But then lender reneged.  There was a few months where neither I nor freeholders were sure what was going on.  Then suddenly demolition works started.   Before one issues a s146 one has to issue a LBA.  That is eventually what happened. ...legal battle took 3y to resolve. Again, order them to revert it as they didn't have permission to do the works, or else serve an S146 notice for breach of the lease   A s146 was served.  It took 3y but the parties came to a settlement.   (They couldn't revert as they had ripped out irreplaceable historical features). The lease has already been extended once so they have no right to another extension. It seems pretty easy to just get the lawyer to say no and stick by those terms as the law is on your side there.  That's not the case   One can ask for another extension.  In this instance the freeholders eventually agreed with a proviso for the receiver not to serve another. You wouldn't vary a lease through a lease extension.  Correct.  But receiver lawyer was an idiot.   He made so many errors.  No idea why the receiver instructed him?  He used to work for lender lawyers. I belatedly discovered he was sacked for dishonesty and fined a huge sum by the sra  (though kept his licence).  He eventually joined another firm and the receiver bizarrely chose him to handle the extension.  Again he messed up - which is why the matter still hasn't been properly concluded.   In reality, its quite clear the lender/ receiver were just trying to overwhelm me with work (and costs) due to so many legal  issues.  Also they tried to twist things (as lawyers sometimes do).  They tried to create a situation where the freeholders would get a wasted costs order - the intent was to bankrupt the freeholders so they could grab the fh that way.   That didn't happen.  They are still trying though.  They owe the freeholders legal costs (s60) and are refusing to pay.  They are trying to get the freeholders to refer the matter to the tribunal - simply to incur more costs (the freeholders don't want and cant's afford to incur)  Enfranchisement isn't something that can be "voided", it's in the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 that leaseholders have the right to.... The property does not qualify under 67 Act.  Their notice was invalid and voided. B petition was struck out. So this is dealt with then.  That action was dealt with yes.   But they then issued a new claim out of a different random court - which I'm still dealing with alone.  This is where I have issues with my old lawyer. He failed to read important legal docs  (which I kept emailing and asking if he was dealing with) and  also didn't deal with something crucial I pointed out.  This lawyer had the lender in a corner and he did not act. Evidence shows lender and receiver strategy had been ....  Redact and scan said evidence up for others to look at?   I could.  But the evidence is clear cut.  Receiver email to lender and lender lawyer: "our strategy for many months  has been for ceo to get the property".  A lender is not allowed to influence the receivership.   They clearly were.  And the law firm were complicit.  The same firm representing the lender and the ceo in his personal capacity - conflict of interest?   I  also have evidence of the lender trying to pay a buyer to walk.  I was never supposed to know about this.  But I was given copies of messages from the receiver "I need to see you face to face, these things are best not put in writing".  No need to divulge all here.  But in hindsight it's clear the lender/ receiver tried - via 2 meetings - to get rid of this buyer (pay large £s) to clear the path for the ceo.   One thing I need to clarify - if a receiver tells a lender to do - or not to do - something should the lender comply? 
    • Why ask for advice if you think it's too complex for the forum members to understand? You'd be better engaging a lawyer. Make sure he has understood all the implications. Stick with his advice. If it doesn't conform to your preconceived opinion then pause and consider whether maybe he's right.
    • The Barclay Card conditions is complete. There was only 3 pages. This had old address on. Full CCA. 15 pages. The only personal info is my name and address. Current Address The rest just like a generic document.  Barclays CCA 260424.pdf
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Offered Compromise Agreement - redundancy/unfair dismissal/sex discrimination case


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4170 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

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Replies 105
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Just completed my ET1 and I don't know what to put for section 6.1. I've done my schedule of loss should I put this in at this stage?? I'm sure I read somewhere that this should be disclosed further down the line. Is this correct??

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi D,

 

I have my ET1 form with me at present, just sign the boxes that you feel apply to your case. I would tick the first box and write a brief statement in section 6.2 which would describe the incident(s) which you believe amounts to your reasons for taking this matter to the employment tribunal.

 

As for the schedule of loss, just hold on to that for the time being, that does not need to be submitted just yet.

 

L x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi L

 

Its S not D but thats OK.

 

I don't have a 6.2 on my form. Maybe you mean 5.2 - to set out the particulars of the case. 6.1 is for how much compensation/remedy I want. Having calculated my schedule of loss it seems extreme. I need to put something but not sure what.

 

S

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologies S.

 

Am not sure what your boxes say, the form may have been updated. What ET1 form version do you have? My one is version 6.5 and this is printed on the Receipt page which you will see when you have printed off your ET1 form.

 

Anyway, if you are not sure what box to tick you can always give the employment tribunal a call, they should have an enquiry line, they will be able to advise accordingly.

 

How did you go about setting out your schedule of loss?

 

L x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Version 7.9

 

I'm doing it online.

 

I've set out my schedule of loss under the individual complaints. Working out what I'd loss in income between now and the tribunal and then for 6 months after the tribunal. Then added the injury to feeling of £15000.

 

I've probably got it wrong but its not up to me what I get anyway....I'm just making a guess.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok thanks S. When it comes to schedule of loss, as long as we are able to explain how we have arrived at the figures set out in the schedule of loss it is ok. There are compensation calculators that you can fill in on line also, this should give you some accurate figures i you have not done so already.

 

Oh and by the way, sometimes it is up to us what we get - I did.

 

L x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry I was just asking about setting a figure for compensation on the ET1 form. You say that you can chose how much you get, or thats what happened to you. But I presumed that this was only the case if you settled out of court rather than the ET judge setting the compensation once the case is won.

 

S

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh ok hon, if we are taking about the ET1 form it should have a section which asks you what you want if the case is successful, if so there should a box amongst others which says "compensation only" if you have ticked this box this is fine, the schedule of loss is something that is dealt with later on.

 

If the matter does not go to court and the other side seeks to settle out of court, there is always a possibility that the compensation figure set out on your schedule of loss will be met but you need to be able to show how you arrive at the figures specified.

 

There is a possibility that they do not give you the compensation which you are asking for but what they offer is reasonable and you are happy with it, there are so many ways that this can work out.

 

L x

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi everyone

 

I've been assigned an ACAS councillor. Can anyone give me an idea of what they do? What is involved??

 

Will it involve a face to face meeting with my ex employer? Or conference calls or do they act as a mediator??

 

Hope you can help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

An ACAS Conciliator is automatically assigned to every case. They don't actually really do anything unless one party requests it, although depending on who you get, they may call to introduce themselves and see if settlement of the case is a possibility.

 

Basically, their role is that of an impartial go between. If you have an offer of settlement to make, it can be done through them. Anything you say to your conciliator is confidential and without prejudice unless you indicate they can reveal anything you tell them. They will also finalise any COT3 Agreement if settlement is achieved.

 

What they can't do at this stage is offer legal advice. They have to now be shown to be impartial and independent.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hi Guys

 

My CMD is coming up tomorrow. The letter says:

 

You must be able to discuss:

 

a) Clarify the isues in the case and give any necesary Orders for further particulars; - I'm OK with clarifying the claim but I'm not sure what particulars I will need as yet. Any guidance would be great. I know all claims are different but ideas might get my brain ticking.

 

b) Consider what, if any, Orders are required for disclosure of documents and the attendance of witnesses; - I'm going to ask for all the documents relating to the redundancy and flexible working request investigation etc. Any other ideas from anyone?? Witnesses - I'm a bit concerned about. Everyone that witnessed this are too scared to be involved. Should I list them anyway? Should I only list the people that will be favourable. Do I get to question the respondents witnesses?

 

c) Arrange if possible, for agreement as to documents; - I have no idea what documents I will receive from the respondent. Should I just list what I have and what I am requesting from the respondent? Can I add documents at a later date at bundle stage.

 

d) Arrange how long the case is likely to last and give directions as to the date and length of the hearing - How am I supposed to know how long the case will take to be heard?? As for date ASAP.

 

e) Give any other directions which may be necessary for the fair and expeditious disposal of the case - is this the schedule of losses??

 

Can anyone help with the questions I've got???

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm struggling with my PCP for indirect sex discrimination. Am I along the right lines with:

 

Although my working hours were 09:30 until 18:00, I was expected to work in excess of my daily working hours, on a daily basis. Working throughout the country, often staying in hotels overnight. This made it impossible to arrange regular childcare, as my hours were never set, plans would change and it was expected that my husband would deal with any changes needed for childcare. When I asked for flexible working hours to ensure that once a week I was home by 6pm in order to facilitate a more regular childcare arrangement, this was denied. This left me at more of a disadvantage than male colleagues as they did not have the responsibility of childcare, whereas I did.

 

Am I along the right lines??

 

The respondents solicitor has said if I use this arguement they will use an objective justification test.

 

How can this be justified when I offered ANY flexible working practice as long as I was able to guarantee being home to my children once a week by 6pm???

 

Hope you can help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, best of luck for tomorrow, just stay calm. I had a telephone CMD last Wednesday, I'm helping a friend. The judge was really good, knew we were unrepresented, and went out of his way to make sure we understood everything. If you don't understand something they don't mind at all if you ask them to explain, they will.

 

One step at a time, that's the way and whatever you feel, never let it show in situations like this X

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Guys

 

You've mad me feel far calmer (its been a stressful day). I know I've left it all really late but I'm still suffering with stress and I've not been sleeping. I'm more of a last minute type of person, so the stress isn't effecting me as much today because I know how important this is.

 

Does anyone have any comments for post #41???

Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest, most of the points are for the judge to decide, and the respondent, if legally represented, will take the lead so there's very little you'll need to know!

 

In terms of witnesses, unless you're planning on requesting a witness order to compel them to attend (which usually isn't advisable) there's really no need to mention them at all. The ET only needs to know who will be attending, not who might be!

 

Hearing length, well that depends on the number of witnesses - if you have none, it's up to them to decide, otherwise as a rule of thumb I'd add a day for every 2-3 witnesses.

 

The final point about fair and expeditious disposal is really irrelevant, it doesnt mean schedule of loss as that will be ordered as part of standard directions. It's just any suggestions to help proceedings, which again you won't be expected to know about.

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...