Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Makers of insect-based animal feed hope to be able to compete with soybeans on price.View the full article
    • Thank you for posting up the results from the sar. The PCN is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. Under Section 9 [2][a] they are supposed to specify the parking time. the photographs show your car in motion both entering and leaving the car park thus not parking. If you have to do a Witness Statement later should they finally take you to Court you will have to continue to state that even though you stayed there for several hours in a small car park and the difference between the ANPR times and the actual parking period may only be a matter of a few minutes  nevertheless the CEL have failed to comply with the Act by failing to specify the parking period. However it looks as if your appeal revealed you were the driver the deficient PCN will not help you as the driver. I suspect that it may have been an appeal from the pub that meant that CEL offered you partly a way out  by allowing you to claim you had made an error in registering your vehicle reg. number . This enabled them to reduce the charge to £20 despite them acknowledging that you hadn't registered at all. We have not seen the signs in the car park yet so we do not what is said on them and all the signs say the same thing. It would be unusual for a pub to have  a Permit Holders Only sign which may discourage casual motorists from stopping there. But if that is the sign then as it prohibits any one who doesn't have a permit, then it cannot form a contract with motorists though it may depend on how the signs are worded.
    • Defence and Counterclaim Claim number XXX Claimant Civil Enforcement Limited Defendant XXXXXXXXXXXXX   How much of the claim do you dispute? I dispute the full amount claimed as shown on the claim form.   Do you dispute this claim because you have already paid it? No, for other reasons.   Defence 1. The Defendant is the recorded keeper of XXXXXXX  2. It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant. 3. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 4. In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant. 5. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 6. In a further abuse of the legal process the Claimant is claiming £50 legal representative's costs, even though they have no legal representative. 7. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all. Signed I am the Defendant - I believe that the facts stated in this form are true XXXXXXXXXXX 01/05/2024   Defendant's date of birth XXXXXXXXXX   Address to which notices about this claim can be sent to you  
    • pop up on the bulk court website detailed on the claimform. [if it is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] . When you select ‘Register’, you will be taken to a screen titled ‘Sign in using Government Gateway’.  Choose ‘Create sign in details’ to register for the first time.  You will be asked to provide your name, email address, set a password and a memorable recovery word. You will be emailed your Government Gateway 12-digit User ID.  You should make a note of your memorable word, or password as these are not included in the email.<<**IMPORTANT**  then log in to the bulk court Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform . defend all leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit the website .get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486334-CPR-31.14-Request-to-use-on-receipt-of-a-PPC-(-Private-Land-Parking-Court-Claim type your name ONLY no need to sign anything .you DO NOT await the return of paperwork. you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform.
    • well post it here as a text in a the msg reply half of it is blanked out. dx  
  • 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

Witness Intimidation plus Ex Employer Lying


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4020 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

  • Replies 97
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Is it relevant to your case?

 

What are you claiming ?

Please contact a member of the site team if you are offered help off the forum for a a paid or no win no fee service.

 

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

Click here to donate through PayPal (opens in a new window)

Link to post
Share on other sites

My ex-employers discriminated against me and certain other individuals. They then physically assaulted me and were arrested and charged.

 

They withheld my wages, said they would make sure I never got another job again and were going to 'get me'.

 

So, I started my own business. Which they then sent false and malicious emails about, so it closed, as well as making me more ill.

 

Then, they did a lot of other things to try and get me to drop the ET case, including criminal acts and threatening my witnesses, so one by one, they dropped out, as they were rightly too scared to give evidence. This is all being investigated by the police btw.

 

I have provided proof from the police that they lied, by saying they didn't attack me and proof from various authorities about the intimidation of myself and witnesses.

 

I would say it was related, because if my witnesses had not been too scared to give evidence, it would be an open and shut case.

 

C

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to hear of your problems. The tibunal is limited in what it can decide upon and you will have to use other legal menas to address all the other points. If your ex-employer is prosecuted successfully then the gates will be wide open for you to sue them for defamation and recover monies for your lost business. i hope that the police take all the other matters seriously and that any charges reflect the full range of your complaints.

As for their solicitors, they take the money and dont have to take the consquences. They will always claim that they only do what they are told to do by their client. Utter tosh but in legal circles it is accepted as being true otherwise 50% of lawyers would be gaoled in every case heard.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to hear of your problems. The tibunal is limited in what it can decide upon and you will have to use other legal menas to address all the other points. If your ex-employer is prosecuted successfully then the gates will be wide open for you to sue them for defamation and recover monies for your lost business. i hope that the police take all the other matters seriously and that any charges reflect the full range of your complaints.

As for their solicitors, they take the money and dont have to take the consquences. They will always claim that they only do what they are told to do by their client. Utter tosh but in legal circles it is accepted as being true otherwise 50% of lawyers would be gaoled in every case heard.

 

Actually a Solicitors primary duty is to the Court, not the client, so what you're saying is not accurate. A solicitor legally has to stop acting for a client if they are asked to mislead the Court.

 

And think about it - if there are solicitors on both sides, logic dictates that one of them has to lose so the win rate for any lawyer could easily be 50%...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Their solicitor has lied too. I won't go into it, but they did. I'm also fairly certain that they know, especially as I have forwarded all the evidence, that they know their clients are lying.

 

In fact, when one respondent was heard saying something threatening about me in the court room, one of their solicitors claimed it couldn't be used against the respondents to illustrate threats against me, as it would not only implicate the solicitor, but when that didn't work, the solicitor then claimed that the threatening comment had been made to them and so came under client / solicitor privilege.

 

This has got to be one of the weirdest court cases ever. Even the judge said so.

Link to post
Share on other sites

During my cross examination of me, all the respondents plus their 'witnesses' have been present.

 

Am I allowed to ask that when I start to question each of the respondents and 'witnesses' am I allowed to ask that prior to questioning, that those I am not questioning are outside of the room. I ask this because they have made up their statements and I believe, if they do not hear each other's answers to my questions, I can prove that they fabricated their statements and evidence.

 

C

Link to post
Share on other sites

During my cross examination of me, all the respondents plus their 'witnesses' have been present.

 

Am I allowed to ask that when I start to question each of the respondents and 'witnesses' am I allowed to ask that prior to questioning, that those I am not questioning are outside of the room. I ask this because they have made up their statements and I believe, if they do not hear each other's answers to my questions, I can prove that they fabricated their statements and evidence.

 

C

 

I don't think so, no. It's a public hearing, so anyone can be present.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a general question, as I have had conflicting answers and found ET 'helpline' not very helpful...

 

I read that there was a precedent set in 2009 relating to use of Skype like services used to interview witnesses. I am asking for this and just wondered if anyone had heard of others using it and whether it was difficult, or easy to get this permission. (There is a very good reason why it is very difficult for the witness to get to the court room.)

 

Also, my witnesses, with good reason, are very scared and an essential witness, does not want to be in same room as our ex-employer. Again, very good reason for not wanting to be in same room. To be honest, I wish there was a way I could not be in same room, as I am constantly intimidated and scared.

 

Is there any way that this witness would be allowed to sit in another room and be videolinked to court room?

 

I know this may sound over the top, but I don't want to go in to full details of the case, but I know that if this was in a criminal court, these provisions are usually made available to victims/witnesses.

 

C

Link to post
Share on other sites

They're in another country, back where they live, over 12 hours flying time.

 

If necessary, they will fly over here to give evidence, but, obviously expensive and I will have to find the money somehow.

 

I read that if someone far away abroad, so not just over the channel, then it can be considered. But I can't find enough information on this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They're in another country, back where they live, over 12 hours flying time.

 

If necessary, they will fly over here to give evidence, but, obviously expensive and I will have to find the money somehow.

 

I read that if someone far away abroad, so not just over the channel, then it can be considered. But I can't find enough information on this.

 

Arguably that's another good reason.

 

Ill see if I can find anything for you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you becky2585. It's why it took me so long to find them, as they were on a road trip heading home.

 

But, without me prompting at all, this person told me everything they remember and volunteered a statement, as they believe what happened to us was disgusting.

 

It will strengthen my case so much. Their statement, plus all the other evidence I have, from the authorities etc. will mean there can be no doubt left that these events occurred as I have said they did.

 

I'm hoping that explaining how crucially important this witness is and the fact that I have made 'extremely serious allegations' (judge's words) that they will see that, in order for justice to prevail, this witness should be allowed to speak.

 

After being on the stand and being made to feel like I was some kind of nutty criminal, I now have some hope, as in the last week, all the evidence I promised the court, has been forwarded to me.

 

I just want to prove I'm telling the truth and try and bring this nightmare to an end.

 

Thank you again :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having had a brief look, it appears as though its only been permitted and published once, in the Reading ET in 2012. That was also for a witness who was abroad. Unfortunately it's an unreported case, so can't be used as a precedent. The other problem is that the Tribunal did not have wi fi (and many don't in my experience). So they had to hire a local hotel to conduct the hearing.

 

Anyway the ET rules should help you here. Rule 15 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2004 provides that “A hearing may be conducted (in whole or in part) by use of electronic communications provided that the Employment Judge or Tribunal conducting the hearing considers it just and equitable to do so”.

 

I can't find anything else, unfortunately,

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for that becky2585. That was super quick! :)

 

The Judge said he really wanted a witness, but he understood why I had difficulty in finding them and then having them come forward.

 

I'm hoping now, that he will see how hard I have tried to get him an important witness and allow this.

 

Plus, I have already considered the wi-fi access and not only am I willing to pay for it, but I already have portable wi-fi access and am happy to provide this, plus laptop and camera and microphone, plus speakers.

 

I have tried to cover as many angles as I can think of, as I really want to prove I'm telling the truth (obviously).

 

Fingers crossed!

 

C

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Quick question. My psychiatrist wrote to the ET and said that although I am mentally competent, I am suffering from depression and due to adverse side effects to medication, my Bipolar condition is currently untreated. He asked that I be given at least six weeks for new medication to work and side effects to wear off. He said that he is concerned that going through the cross examination process now, is likely to cause me harm, mentally and physically.

 

Today, the ET said that because I am mentally competent, although depressed and unwell, I must continue with the hearing tomorrow and the rest of this week.

 

While I was being cross examined, two weeks ago, I kept breaking down and threw up twice, partly because the people who attacked me, kept walking into the claimants' room and partly because they are sat right next to me and constantly attempt to intimidate me. The judge said I was not fit to continue and sent me home.

 

In the past two weeks, I have had two Gp emergency appointments, two emergency psych appointments, one planned psych appointment and a hospital admission, plus extremely painful side effects from meds, which I then had to stop taking.

 

Tomorrow, I was supposed to see Gp, have an emergency home visit from a psychiatric care in community team and telephone advice from solicitor. I have had to cancel these, as I can't afford for the ET to throw my claim out.

 

Tomorrow morning, I have to attend Gp surgery to pick up emergency new prescription, to try and treat depression and bipolar symptoms. It is very likely that on top of depression and symptoms of dissociation and self harming, that I will experience side effects, including pain and confusion from the meds.

 

I am confused as to how the ET can believe that I am fit to attend court and be cross examined tomorrow. I also have no-one to accompany me, as everyone believed (consultant, legal advisor, gp) that I was unfit to attend.

 

Is this normal? Is this fair? Is there anything I can do? Also, I am currently under even more stress as police are currently investigating various criminal activities directed at me and possible witness intimidation.

 

I actually don't know how I'm going to get through tomorrow and have been advised to A & E, but can't risk having my case thrown out because of not turning up.

 

Any advice?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Calamity, I don;t know the answers. But is it possible that putting it off, and having the worry for longer, could be worse? I tend to think getting it over ewith either way is a good thing.

 

Your GP will be there the day after, as will the police. They can wait.

Never assume anyone on the internet is who they say they are. Only rely on advice from insured professionals you have paid for!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Emmzzi, There is that, but it is extremely hard to answer questions and ask questions when I can't think straight and am in pain.

 

There are a few other complications as well, but I was just hoping for a few weeks to stop being so ill and for last of evidence and witness statements to come through.

 

I now have witnesses & have provided police reports of assault and copies of malicious communications, but this doesn't appear to have been acknowledged by either the ET, or respondents' solicitor. I find it confusing. Also, after repeated requests to see original documents, I still haven't seen them... and I know they're faked.

 

Just hard trying to operate when not at full capacity.

Link to post
Share on other sites

if the documents haven't been acknowledged you can always give the court a ring to check.

 

I am so sorry you are feeling this way. Do take care of yourself! Hopefully someone with better advice on illness and court will be along in a bit.

Never assume anyone on the internet is who they say they are. Only rely on advice from insured professionals you have paid for!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Emmzzi.

 

I read, and was told, even by the Judge, that I wasn't allowed to continue if unwell. I have to leave the room to throw up, basically.

 

The Judge sent me home because he said if I was unwell then if I don't like decision, it gives me grounds for appeal.

 

So I'm a bit surprised by order to attend, as I am more unwell this week, than when in court a couple of weeks ago.

 

I will just have to keep leaving the room to throw up and have regular breaks is all. I'm also concerned I'll embarrass myself, as when the pain becomes too much, I collapse onto the floor and have trouble trying not to groan because of the pain. I don't really like anyone to see that. Especially not the respondents.

Link to post
Share on other sites

how long has this process been going on? do you need to watch for the case beng thrown out as it is unlikely to conclude in a reasonable time frame? or is it just a few months?

Never assume anyone on the internet is who they say they are. Only rely on advice from insured professionals you have paid for!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I originally submitted the ET1 in Jan 2012.

 

The respondents didn't reply. So in May 2012, the ET resubmitted my ET1 to the respondents, who then claimed they had not received the first ET1. I know from previous incidents that the respondents ignore legal letters from solicitors of ex-employees, because they expect people to give up and go away.

 

I had pre-hearing and CMD in Aug 2012 I think. Maybe September. I then had first day of hearing in Mid-Jan 2013 I believe. I was there a week. Sent home. Too ill for one day two weeks ago and now this is continuation of hearing. So I haven't had lots of adjournments, or anything.

 

The Psychiatrist asked if the court could delay the rest of the hearing by six weeks, as I am so ill at the moment. The ET refused.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...