Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I feel that people are focusing too much on the OPs property being a council house and putting responsibility on the council to resolve this.   imagine for a moment that the OPs house is privately owned, now what powers would they have to take action on the trees? Pretty much none without taking the tree owner to court right. Well as the trees are privately owned, that is the same power that the council have right now.   the information with the £375 will be inline with high hedges legislation as this will be the only power the council will have and it is common for there to be a charge for this.   this is not a social housing issue, but a neighbor dispute with a private homeowner.   i used to work as a tree officer for a local authority and from experience have seen that people’s idea of dangerous and what is actually dangerous are two different issues. A councils power to enforce tree works are also limited and will usually only be where a private tree poses a risk to the highway, not to another property as that is a civil matter (even where the council own the 2nd property).    With regards to risk to underground pipes, this is something you will be unlikely to successfully argue as various studies have found that unless a tree is planted on top of the pipe and crush it, the roots will not cause damage, but rather only enter through already damaged areas as they are opportunistic, any tree roots in drains are usually a secondary issue where a pipe had existing damage and to resolve it will require a permanent repair to the pipe to prevent recurrence.   the only options i see here are to calculate the height allowed under high hedges legislation (it varies depending on what direction the property faces , the location of hedges etc) and try to enforce that which will involve the fee. Otherwise there is little you can do as the private homeowner has a right to have trees in their garden although they may be liable if they were to cause damage to your property (such as a shed) or the councils property in the future.
    • Served on 16 Feb.   On reviewing the MCOL website today for an updated, I noticed that 1) Hermes has aknowledged the claim, but not yet filed a defence, and 2) that I there was a glitch / error on the form. Essentially, it looks like I had accidentally left the "I will send detailed particulars of claim" box ticke (I thought I had unticked it), with the result that the claim section has been truncated, and some extra text has automatcially been added - in red below):   "...Claimant seeks £XXX, plus I will provide the defendant with separate detailed particulars within 14 days after service of the claim form. The claimant claims interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of..."   This is obviously not ideal. Is it better to try to amend the claim somehow, or to just submit a brief POC that a) clarifies that I am seeking £XXX plus costs (which was automatically truncated), and b) sets out my calculation of the £XXX?  
    • Hi   It amazes me how they pass the buck as they don't want to deal with a private homeowner but if the shoe was on the other foot they would be hammering down on you for breach of tenancy.   As this is council housing you need to make a Formal Complaint in writing to the Council Housing about this (as a social housing landlord they have a complaints process they have to follow). you need to exhaust their complaints process. Make sure and title your letter Formal Complaint.   From what you have posted this tree is not just a nuisance but also a Health & Safety risk:   1. The tree being overgrown is now a danger to the occupants/Guest/Visitors to your property   2. The tree has overgrown into the Council Housings Boundaries your property causing damage/endangerment to the occupants/guest/visitors.   3. As the roots of the tree are also overgrown into your property you have concerns that these may be causing/damaging to any underground pipework that may be within the boundray of the property.   4. So far the Councils actions have been to treat their Council Housing tenant as a third class citizen with a private homeowner aloud to cause endangerment/possible damage due to these overgrown trees which are encroaching on your council house property/bounderies.   You also require clarification why you were sent the Healthy Neighbourhood Information which states I have to pay £375 to make a complaint. (make sure and attach a copy of the response that states this cost)   You also require copies of the following:   1. Complaints Policy (not the leaflet) 2. Customer Service Standard (not the leaflet) 3. Health & Safety Policy (not the leaflet) 4. Public Liability Insurance Policy. (not the leaflet) 5. Clarification from you if their is any underground pipeworks running through the bounderies within the garden area (you should have full knowledge of this it being your property/plans) 6. Compensation Policy (not the leaaflet) 7. Equality & Diversity Policy (not the leaflet)   When you get the above policies sit with a pen/pencil/highlighter and take you time reading them and just think to yourself 'DID THEY DO THAT' if not mark it then leave it for a while then do the same again this way you can basically throw/write back stating the haven't followed x policy with which part of that policy and your reason. (you are building evidence to use against them using their own policies. I would also like to refer you to The Local Government (Miscellaneous Provision) Act 1976: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1976/57/part/I/crossheading/dangerous-trees-and-excavations     You need to remember yes it is the Council but the Council Housing is a separate entity and is a Registered Social Landlord (RSL)   Is the Council Housing classed as a registered Charity? (what is their registration number whether charity or RSL?)   Also have a wee look at this CAG link:     
    • @rocky_sharma   Fame at last!!   Dunno how much help it would be in your case, but I could try digging out the txt of my defence if you think it might be relevant to your defence. We might hafta do this via PM, then e-mail though if ya wanna go down that route.   Good luck with yours anyway mate.
  • Our picks

Su0906

Employment Tribunal - Disputed Disclosure and Trial Bundle

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1635 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

I am really hoping someone can advise me here on the procedures for dealing with the following. I am the claimant and the respondent is disputing the majority of correspondence under S111 of Employment Rights Act. However, the Respondent does refer to this correspondence all the way through their particulars of response and is fundamental to my claim. I understand that S111 is not applicable in discrimination cases. My question is how do I go about getting this included in the trial bundle. I presume I make an application to the Judge to rule on this. I want the correspondence included as it clearly shows that the Respondent is lying in their particulars of response and is crucial to my case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

S111

 

(1)A complaint may be presented to an [F1employment tribunal] against an employer by any person that he was unfairly dismissed by the employer.

(2)[F2Subject to the following provisions of this section]F2, an [F1employment tribunal] shall not consider a complaint under this section unless it is presented to the tribunal—

(a)before the end of the period of three months beginning with the effective date of termination, or

(b)within such further period as the tribunal considers reasonable in a case where it is satisfied that it was not reasonably practicable for the complaint to be presented before the end of that period of three months.

(3)Where a dismissal is with notice, an [F1employment tribunal] shall consider a complaint under this section if it is presented after the notice is given but before the effective date of termination.

(4)In relation to a complaint which is presented as mentioned in subsection (3), the provisions of this Act, so far as they relate to unfair dismissal, have effect as if—

(a)references to a complaint by a person that he was unfairly dismissed by his employer included references to a complaint by a person that his employer has given him notice in such circumstances that he will be unfairly dismissed when the notice expires,

(b)references to reinstatement included references to the withdrawal of the notice by the employer,

©references to the effective date of termination included references to the date which would be the effective date of termination on the expiry of the notice, and

(d)references to an employee ceasing to be employed included references to an employee having been given notice of dismissal.

[F3(5)Where the dismissal is alleged to be unfair by virtue of section 104F (blacklists),

(a)subsection (2)(b) does not apply, and

(b)an employment tribunal may consider a complaint that is otherwise out of time if, in all the circumstances of the case, it considers that it is just and equitable to do so.F3]

 

 

 

 

OK please can we have some background so people can help you.

What is the disputed correspondence

 

What grounds are they refusing you to submit them?


PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

 

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Background

 

My claim is indirection sex discrimination and constructive dismissal. My employer requested I change my hours from part time to full time for the needs of the business. I advised I could not do this due to my child care commitments. Verbally my employer suggested a settlement agreement and proceeded to advertise my job. The settlement agreement was never forthcoming so I instructed a solicitor to protect my employment position, the majority of the WP letter from my solicitor deals with concerns of the way I was being treated with one final para suggesting a settlement. The numerous responses from my employer were not marked "WP" and did not deal with any suggestions as to how to resolve the situation but merely were aggressive and full of denials.

 

The Respondent is ascertaining within their defence that I never requested a job share which is why it was not considered. The correspondence between my solicitor and my employer clearly shows this is not the case as job sharing was requested on numerous times and ignored by the Respondent. I , on the advice of my solicitor at the time, also converted the majority of the text from my solicitors letter (excluding the one para about settlement) into a formal grievance from myself to my employer which the Respondent is also not agreeing to be included.

 

The Respondent's grounds for reefusal are that the correspondence falls under pre termination negotiations under S111 but I would disagree with this as I was trying to keep my job and nowhere does the respondent refer or discuss my termination from the company so my view is that this correspondence was dealing with internal grievances that I wished to get resolved. I would also say that the employer has behaved improperly within the correspondence as it is intimidating and aggressive with absolutely no suggestion of resolving anything at all.

 

Ironically, the Respondent refers to the above correspondence all the way through their particulars of response as a defence that they were dealing with the concerns under WP discussions but now do not want this correspondence included despite the fact they themselves are using them as their defence!

 

Hope this helps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks that should help others.

 

Will flag this to the site team for you.


PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

 

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FROM CAB

 

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/work/problems-at-work/employment-tribunals/preparing-an-employment-tribunal-case/#h-what-s-a-bundle-

 

What's a bundle?

 

A bundle is the file of documents that the tribunal will need to look at during the hearing. These documents are the evidence in your case. Usually your employer will produce the bundle, partly because they should have all the documents that need to be in it. If you have a case management discussion, you may want to ask for an order for your employer to produce the bundle.

You usually need to agree with your employer what documents should be put in the bundle. There can be disagreements about this. If so, two bundles may be produced – one by you and one by your employer. But tribunals don’t like this because it can make following the evidence difficult, so try to agree documents with your employer if you can.

 

If you have a representative, they will produce the bundle if they need to. If you don't have a representative and you need to produce the bundle, you should include in it all the documents that are important to your case, and that you want to refer to at the hearing. There is a standard way that the bundle should be put together.

 

If you don't have a representative helping you, there may be an organisation which can give you advice on what should be in the bundle.

For details of organisations that might be able to help, see What help can I get with a problem at work.

 

If you're producing the bundle, you need six copies - one for each member of the tribunal panel, one for the employer, one for you and one for the witnesses."

 

As long as either you or the employer refer to the items you want to include and they dont then I'm guessing it is upto them to argue they are inadmissible


PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

 

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You mean to refer to section 111A of the Act, not s111. See http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2013/24/section/14/enacted.

 

The commonly accepted interpretation of s111A is that it does not apply to discrimination claims. See the ACAS guidance on this at http://www.acas.org.uk/media/pdf/j/8/Acas-Code-of-Practice-on-Settlement-Agreements.pdf. I find it very difficult to see how the employer could possibly on 111A in circumstances where you are alleging discrimination.

 

I do not think that your grievance can sensibly be categorised as 'pre-termination negotiations', and therefore should not be covered by s111A in any event.

 

I would suggest putting this to the employer in writing. If they still refuse to include the correspondence in the bundle, you should suggest that an 'agreed bundle' and a 'disputed bundle' are prepared. The disputed bundle would contain the disputed correspondence. You would draw the tribunal's attention to that at the beginning of the hearing and ask them to decide on admissibility.


PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...