Respondent demanding £800 by Monday

[Emmzzi]

I've yet to read of anyone bringing a corporate to justice via e.t. if that is why you are doing this, stop now and save pain and cash.

[BlindVision]

emmzzi, so you don't believe in ethics? So people should ignore white collar fraud or inappropriate behaviour? The mafia in Italy should have been allowed to overrun the judiciary? The first point of contact for workplace legal issues - aside from small sums of money owed - will be the e.t. For example, if you sustain a personal injury at work, the courts will expect your first stop to be the e.t.

 

In my case, I am also getting the regulators involved. The concept of justice is a very important one, if we are not to become little better than some third world corrupt regimes.

[steampowered]

The ET only has jurisdiction to compensate the individual employee in a particular case for the losses suffered by that employee. It cannot order an employer to change its practices or make any general determination affecting the company's employees generally. It also cannot fine or take regulatory action against the employer.

 

The ET has no jurisdiction over personal injury claims. PI claims must be brought through court and only court.

[BlindVision]

Oh, OK. I must be thinking of something else. I thought PI could only be brought outside the e.t. if there was psychiatric injury involved.

 

It does change all the time, steampowered, as the e.t. now has power to refer a complaint to the appropriate authorities if the claimant ticks a box on the ET1 asking for this.

 

You don't report breaches just for money, surely? However, if it affects you, then you can claim if you suffer detriment and it is within the jurisdiction as a protected act.

[Emmzzi]

I believe in looking after your own mental health before anything else, end of.

[steampowered]

Oh, OK. I must be thinking of something else. I thought PI could only be brought outside the e.t. if there was psychiatric injury involved.

All PI claims go through the court system. You may be thinking of mediation, which is basically a process under which the claimant/defendant in a court process sit down to see if they can reach a settlement. This is encouraged by the court but is not mandatory.

 

It does change all the time, steampowered, as the e.t. now has power to refer a complaint to the appropriate authorities if the claimant ticks a box on the ET1 asking for this.

This checkbox only refers to 'whistleblowing' claims. This is a specific type of claim that only affects a small minority of cases. Even in whistleblowing cases all the ET staff might do is send the form on to the relevant regulator, the ET itself can't do anything.

 

You don't report breaches just for money, surely? However, if it affects you, then you can claim if you suffer detriment and it is within the jurisdiction as a protected act.

The ET is not a regulator. The ET is only a tribunal which acts like a civil court. In other words, it is only there to resolve disputes between two private parties.

 

If you want to report breaches so that the employer gets fined or punished, you would need to report them to the relevant regulator. For example, if it is a minimum wage issue, HMRC is responsible for that. If it is a health and safety issue, HSE are responsible.

[BlindVision]

Thanks for the wise words, steampowered and emmzzi. It is a real maze.

 

Update to the issue. The Respondent applied to the ET as they threatened to strike out my case. Had a reply today. The Judge said they have been ordered to produce the bundle and to carry on with it. the issue of when I pay it by is nothing to do with him, he points out.

 

I have asked their lawyers for the breakdown of how they got to their figures and if it includes an hourly cost.

 

I want to concentrate on the actual case and not get sidetracked by peripheral issues, such as the cost of the bundle. Sheesh! Talk about stressed. I will of course contribute. The last thing I want is them turning up on my doorstep, with the sheriffs.

 

When I collated the copies of the documents I wanted for the bundle (about 200 pages) a very nice Western Union type shop charged me just £20 or so. Multiply that by six, it is still only £120.

 

In the meantime, they are refusing to release my copy of the bundle, which means it will be difficult for me to write up a decent witness statement with the documentary cross reference.

 

What shall I do next?

[steampowered]

You should not be so scared about them turning up at your door. Sheriffs etc. cannot do anything without a court order/judgment saying you must pay a sum of money. The important thing is to understand the system.

 

I would be tempted to apply to the Tribunal for an order that (1) the copying costs you are required to pay are set at a particular amount (suggest a reasonable amount) and (2) that the Respondent releases the bundle to you within 7 days.

 

You can begin writing your witness statement just with blank cross-references. This is how it is done in practice ... you normally start writing your statement before the bundle has been finalised.

[BlindVision]

Update: They have now made an application challenging the judge's edict to carry on with the bundle on the grounds of why should we pay we didn't bring the case and it's not in our budget. They have a copy of the bundle for themselves to start writing their witness statement.

 

They want a ruling I cannot receive a copy until I pay some more money, even though I've paid some already and have volunteered regular contributions.

 

I sent an objection to say this. What should I do next?

 

I already asked for a £500 cap at the PH and he just wrote, "reasonable sum".

 

I don't want to fall into a trap of making lots of applications, as they are doing.

[Sidewinder]

I can't see their request being successful and this all seems rather bizarre. It is common practice for the respondent to have to prepare the bundle and I think they are lucky in getting the Judge to agree to the Claimant having to contribute.

 

Have they indicated that they do not believe that the case has merit? Has there been a preliminary hearing to establish whether the case should proceed? It would be customary for the Respondent to apply for a costs order to recover the cost later rather than to risk the Judge's wrath at an early stage.

 

It might seem drastic, but if the judge has ordered the respondent to prepare the bundle, and the Orders set out a timetable for this, I would consider applying for an Unless order to say that either the bundle is prepared and released to you by the date previously ordered by the Judge, then he should consider striking out the defence.

 

This is clearly a further attempt to undermine your claim and get you to withdraw IMO

[BlindVision]

It's strong. Sent for listing from the outset. PH was to iron out issues and set timetable for hearing.

 

I'll see what the response is, first. It's my perception tribunals are loathe to strike out a defense as it's in the public interest to hear the explanation for the treatment. I think it would just be ignored if I requested strike out.

 

Soz, misread. The idea of an unless order is a good one, but do you know what, it makes me feel tired to go to that length just yet.

 

I expect they will be hoist by their own petard.

[steampowered]

I don't think you should be worried about making too many applications. It seems to me that an application is genuinely needed to resolve this.

 

What really messes up the tribunal system is not the need to make minor orders like this, it is wastage of the tribunal calendar when trials have to be delayed or people do not have adequate time to prepare for hearings. You are much better off resolving this ASAP than risking it affecting the trial date.

 

If there is already an order for you to pay a 'reasonable sum', I would write to the Tribunal objecting to the application. This letter should mention what you have paid already, mention that the sum being requested is patently unreasonable and mention what you think a reasonable amount should be, and seek an order from the Tribunal confirming this. 500 sounds pretty high; why don't you suggest 100 in the first instance. You may seek an order that (for example) the bundle be released to you within 3 days.

[BlindVision]

There is no order for me to pay. The judge pointed this out to the r's in his terse order to them to carry on with the bundle.

 

They will not succeed in delaying the hearing. I have a draft bundle (unpaginated) so I can get cracking on the Witness Statement shortly, with a good stock of post-it notes for page reference.

 

What I'll do is remit another amount today to show it is not won't, but can't, and preempt their application.

 

They have nothing to lose by behaving badly. I will just have to keep calm and not get involved in their strategy of trying to price me out.

[steampowered]

I don't think sending them random amounts is the right approach. It will only encourage them to ask for more. The Tribunal will not care whether or not it is won't or can't. In law the only issue is whether you are legally required to do something or not required to do something, the underlying attitude is usually not important.

[BlindVision]

Thanks sp. I just want the bundle and to get on with it in time for the hearing without their having any good reason for delaying.

 

They are keen to restart COT3 negotiations. They have been sent a strong mesage by the tribunal, who must be aware how much it will cost them with their high band chambers barristers over four weeks. They did not even dare try for a no reasonable prospect of sucess application, as there is no hiding their blatant unfairness and victimisation. They had to admit to the tribunal they had no grounds for the cause of action, nor any evidence, so are now relying on well worn cliches about "breakdown of relations", smooth running of business and my "deep mistrust" of them...based on my querying their conduct and their statutory breaches.

 

As an example, I complained to the ICO about their refusal to tell me what their "allegations" were. They claim this is proof of my "mistrust". However, ICO backed me up and said under the DPA98 it was "unlikely" they had complied with DPA and, in their opinion, giving me the information I was entitled to, was the least I could expect.

 

This is just one of the procedural irregularities.

 

They have also revealed they have destroyed all interview notes so cannot disclose them to the tribunal.

[Sidewinder]

I would certainly be looking to recover the amounts that you have paid if/hen successful at the full hearing - their behaviour seems completely unreasonable and it already sounds like the Judge might be receptive to a costs application

[BlindVision]

They have offered to repay the £2K as part of the settlement. However, I have had minimal costs apart from that.

 

The HR person they brought in, who is in a "Strategic Alliance" with the r's solicitors (their words) demanded I pay her £10 for SAR which she then pocketed and refused to give me SAR. The ICO was critical of this.

 

I had brought statutory, financial and internal controls breaches to their attention, which as a chartered accountant, I have a professional duty and obligation to do. The HR"consultant" claimed this was gross misconduct.

 

My father died suddenly as she was writing up her "investigation report". I was away 3 days on compassionate leave. When I returned, the woman who had demanded my suspension 3 years ago, which resulted in the firm being awarded compensation costs to me, sent me an email saying she had gone through my emails while I was away. I sent a polite one line reply asking if she had accessed the confidential e-mail from HR (under DPA you are entitled to privacy).

 

The HR consultant claimed this was me "bullying and harassing" this woman and that I should be disciplined for gross misconduct. She happened by coincidence to be finalising her report do was able to claim, "this was the straw that broke the camel's back", to strengthen her report. The woman claimed I had made the other person breakdown in tears and had to go home as she could not work with me any longer. They claimed I caused her shingles and psoriasis of the fingernail. However, when I asked for medical evidence at the PH, they withdrew this claim.

 

I discovered by pure chance that the woman had not gone home ill or in tears at all. She had already arranged to work from home on an intricate QAD report. Dozens of emails in the public folders showed she was perfectly happy and able to concentrate on the report. There was even banter that she wasn't feeling well but "must be a bug" as her uncle had the same thing.

 

They even forged documents in the bundle rather than be honest about why other staff had left.

 

The PIDA is about money laundering, white collar fraud and VAT fraud.

 

In the "investigation report" the HR consultant wrote in her introduction I was being investigated for having brought proceedings and "made this woman cry." (Yes, dear Reader, they spelt it out.)

 

The r's even tried to pursue me for £225K costs for the part of my claim not made out, citing the above as a reason. At the costs hearing in June, the barrister, legal team and r's were in a merry mood, laughing and joking as we were waiting to go in.

 

The judge threw out their application (on all 13 points, including the above) and in the written reasons heavily criticised the r's.

 

In effect, I was suddenly frogmarched out of my job with no pay or notice, for no genuine reason, on an automatically unfair reason, by their own account.

 

What is most unforgiveable I was in pieces over my father's passing and yet was informed, "you made Sue cry and made her ill so she had to go home."

 

The partner hearing my appeal was the same one who threatened to discipline me when I raised a query about Sue ordering me get unregistered junior staff to use her bank SMARTcard and PIN, when there was no justification for such an order that I could see. We had access to thousands of clients accounts. It was unreasonable, as it was easy enough to register a user.

 

The list of my misdemeanours includes looking at her with a blank face, asking her to put a document on my desk, and objecting to her searching through my desk, drawers and tray several times a day. This behaviour started immediately I was given a hearing date. She also insisted her waste paper basket filled with her food remains should be next to my chair. When I politely asked her to move it, she said each time the cleaning lady put it there.

 

Everybody else kept their bin under the desk.

Edited August 21, 2014 by BlindVision

[steampowered]

Do you have legal help for this?

 

To be very franky with you, if there is no tribunal order requiring you to pay towards the bundle, then I think paying a single penny is very foolish and I am not sure why you are doing it. The normal position is that the claimant does not pay towards the bundle. Paying random small amounts is not going to get them to release the bundle. It seems to me that you are encouraging their behaviour.

 

If they are not releasing the bundle, go straight to the Tribunal to seek an order that they do so. I'm not sure why you are hesitating.

[Emmzzi]

Hon, you are too emotionally involved. No one gives a stuff about where the bin is - not me and certainly not the judge.

 

Get your head out of the detail, look at what is important, use the financial regulators where required and make sure the ET is only about employment issues, and significant ones at that.

 

Otherwise, you sound like a rambling madman.

 

What are the two or three key matters you are raising? Get focused on them. More than that = mad and easy to discount.

[BlindVision]

emmzzi, the bin is not important at all, as illustrated in that I put up with it silently for months. However, it is indicative of the mentality.

 

What is serious is the attempt to conceal potential organised crime by wantonly discrediting anyone raising a query.

 

I did go to police as my name was used for apparent money laundering, who simply gave me a scrap of paper for the fraud online website. I went to the site, which said tax issues and money laundering issues should be reported to HMRC. I went to HMRC webpage and reported it. Also the Insolvency Service, who forwarded some of the issues to the regulators ICAE&W, who wrote to me requesting evidence, and they are now assessing the ethical and professional conduct and will let me know if they will investigate it as a disciplinary matter by end of August. HMRC said they cannot give me feedback as any investigation is confidential, but might need me for a witness statement if necessary.

 

The tribunal will assess whether I am protected from being disciplined for pointing out you cannot use VAT as a financial instrument, or a borrowing, especially in cash based accounting, which has the force of law. This woman deibetately ignored my advice about keeping proper VAT records. VAT repayments were coming in which I knew nothing about, and the VAT not recorded on the clients' records, except in retrospect.

 

One case had a loss of £50K. The lawyers acting for us sent us a VAT only invoice inthe sum of £50K, which was sent for a VAT repayment. I only knew about it when the receipt came in. I asked for the paperwork to record the transactions in the client cash book and was told that, "as it is now exactly a zero balance, it doesn't need to be recorded".

 

As this had the potential to be seen as fraudulent, and, frankly wrong not to keep a record of the transactions (VAT Act re record keeping) I approached the senior partner to ask that an auditor looked at it (we had no auditors or audit committee). I was brushed off.

 

When I was accused of "gross misconduct" in "bullying and harassing" this woman for raising statutory, compliance and internal control issues, through HR and the partners, I asked to discuss the matters with the regulators and was refused.

 

emmzzi, are you saying I should accept my punishment of summary dismissal with no pay or notice, or am I right to take it to tribunal? Is it really "crazy ramblings of a madman"?

 

I should just accept it, presumably.

 

What you would do in my position, emmzzi? I am curious.

[BlindVision]

Do you have legal help for this?

 

To be very franky with you, if there is no tribunal order requiring you to pay towards the bundle, then I think paying a single penny is very foolish and I am not sure why you are doing it. The normal position is that the claimant does not pay towards the bundle. Paying random small amounts is not going to get them to release the bundle. It seems to me that you are encouraging their behaviour.

 

If they are not releasing the bundle, go straight to the Tribunal to seek an order that they do so. I'm not sure why you are hesitating.

 

 

A truly brilliant barrister from a top chambers has given me pro bono help, and offered to help in the hearing. However, as the costs are prohibitive £1K per diem minimum for a hearing, bar pro bono cannot give more than three day's assistance.

 

CAB have been good, and FRU, but they do have very limited resources.

 

High street lawyers have been disappointing with little better knowledge of employment law than me.

 

I cannot afford a direct barrister just now.

[BlindVision]

It appears they are keen to finalise a settlement with me today. If I go quiet, then you'll know why.

 

Thanks for all your assistance in this matter; very much appreciated.

[steampowered]

Good luck, and remember that "final" offers are almost never final.

[BlindVision]

Looks like everybody's out of town for the next week or so. Guess I can crack on with the witness statement.

[Emmzzi]

 

emmzzi, are you saying I should accept my punishment of summary dismissal with no pay or notice, or am I right to take it to tribunal? Is it really "crazy ramblings of a madman"?

 

I should just accept it, presumably.

 

What you would do in my position, emmzzi? I am curious.

 

I'm not saying that. I'm saying focus on employment issues within the jurisdiction of the court, and stop writing about trivia. Make it easy for the judge to agree with you. Basic influencing skills!