Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Even though I’ve been paying them for this long?    I know you’re going to say something along the lines of “because they’re a bunch of muppets” but why are they doing this as if I’ve not been paying?   dx - I took the name and address out for privacy...
    • you didn't pay lidls the speculative invoice charge of £45.   the only connection to them is their head office signed their region up to have their local stores car parks managed by the scammers because they had been duped into thinking people that abuse their car parks cost the region xxx in lost shopping revenue because another shopper could have used it.   they never see any of the money these bandits gleam from people paying a speculative invoice off ever and annually get ripped off by paying the fleecers £10'000 each year to give them permission to manage their carparks. anyone that pays the money goes directly into the parking fleecers pockets.   however i understand you are new and green but part of a forum is also self help which relates to my comment about where did you ever get the idea to pay them from...certainly not here.   so lidls wont be doing and can't do anything further, they certain wont be interested in instructing their fleecers to refund you and can't and most certainly won't refund you themselves.   go do a chargeback   dx              
    • OK,  I have not claimed anyone told us to pay in this forum.   As grown up adults we made this decision. I am sharing our experience in case it benefits anyone.    Our approach to this is if Lidl didn't help at the end we would take our shopping elsewhere and the so called reduced charge of £45 paid would be the end of the story, even if is unfair.    As I mentioned Lidl cust. service already emailed us to confirm that they have contacted Athena to cancel the charge, I'll first follow up with Lidl. If not resolved will resort to chargeback.  
    • no one ever said PAY THEM, you never ever do that.   if you paid by debit card go get it back by a chargeback to your issuing bank.      
    • The head of the Confederation of British Industry urges a "spirit of compromise" as trade talks resume. View the full article
  • Our picks

    • @curryspcworld @TeamKnowhowUK - Samsung 75 8K TV - completely broken by Currys. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/426151-samsung-75-8k-tv-completely-broken-by-currys/&do=findComment&comment=5069075
      • 6 replies
    • @skinnyfoodco Skinny Foods. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/426130-skinny-foods/&do=findComment&comment=5068996
      • 8 replies
    • I’m in desperate need of help
       
      I bought some clothes online in may through Evans and paid through PayPal
      returned them all seven days later
       
      I waited the 14days for my refund and no refund came
      I put in a dispute through PayPal but I didn’t get any emails to escalate the case - PayPal closed it. 
      evans said they couldn’t refund the money because PayPal have cancelled the refund because of the open dispute
       
      I contacted PayPal
      they said the dispute had been closed but Evans at no point had attempted a refund.
      fast forward to today
       
      I’ve got copies of numerous messages sent to and from twitter messages as it’s the only way I can contact them
      I’ve also contacted their customer service too
      all I get is PayPal have cancelled refund because dispute is still open.
       
      I have proved that the dispute is closed
      I have got an email saying that if Evans sent the refund they would accept it
      but up until the date I got the email they have not once attempted a refund .
       
       I have sent them a letter before court email
      I have even offered to have the full refund as a gift card just to get this sorted !
       
      I’m literally at the end of my tether and don’t know where to turn next !
       
      i suffer with mental health issues and this is affecting my health and I’d saved the money for a year to buy these clothes as I’m on a low income .
    • In desperate need of help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/425244-in-desperate-need-of-help/&do=findComment&comment=5067040
      • 29 replies

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 605 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 taking ex-employer to an Employment Tribunal for age and disability discrimination. Up until 2 weeks ago they were adamant that I was not going to get a penny from them and they have engaged a very expensive lawyer. They had denied all allegations of the existence of documents that contained discriminatory and offensive remarks, documents which I had seen and knew existed.

 

However, at the Preliminary Hearing in December their lawyer was put under pressure by the judge and eventually conceded that the respondent did not deny the existence or contents of such documents. The judge subsequently issued the Case Orders and Case Management Summary document. Within that he has put on record that the respondent, via their lawyer, does not deny the existence of the offending documents. Which obviously means they'd have to disclose them as they can't now say they don't exist. I have applied for the respondent's defence to be struck out on the grounds that it is vexatious and completely contrary to what they have subsequently conceded at the Preliminary Hearing. I have not yet had a response to this request from the tribunal.

 

Following the tribunal issuing the Case Management Orders and Summary the respondent's lawyer has suddenly made approaches to settle the case. However, even after negotiation the amount offered is probably only 50% of what a tribunal would award (they started at around 15% of claim value).

 

Therefore, should I settle now or should I wait to see if the Tribunal strikes out their defence ? It is difficult to see how they can defend their case anyhow even if it is not struck out. If they disclose the documents then they are bound to lose, if they don't disclose then how can they justify that to the tribunal having already admitted they exist ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

How much would that 50% be?

Also if they settle as part of the agreement - Have something in place that says they will pay costs for settling the issue at hand?

 

We could do with some help from you.

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

**Fko-Filee**

Receptaculum Ignis

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The settlement puts it in the top end of the lower band of Vento scale. I would argue in court it should be at least middle range of the middle band, possibly higher.

 

The proposed agreement says that neither side will pursue the other for costs. I am self-represented so don't have any costs.

 

My issue is that the fact that they have gone from "won't pay a penny" to actively wanting to settle makes me think I'd be selling myself short if I did accept. Such a big turnaround in their attitude surely means they think they can't win in tribunal ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If paying out costs less than the solicitors going to court, they'll make an offer. Often it's nothing to do with the merits of the case, so don't assume it is. It's just about cash.

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
If paying out costs less than the solicitors going to court, they'll make an offer. Often it's nothing to do with the merits of the case, so don't assume it is. It's just about cash.

 

Yes I am aware of that. But it seems to me that they now have no defence. The only defence in their ET3 was a denial of the documents' existence. Then they admitted the existence of them at the Preliminary Hearing. So surely their ET3 defence is no longer valid ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've no experience at all with these procedures for this area of law – but were these statements signed as a statement of truth?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes I am aware of that. But it seems to me that they now have no defence. The only defence in their ET3 was a denial of the documents' existence. Then they admitted the existence of them at the Preliminary Hearing. So surely their ET3 defence is no longer valid ?

 

You might be straw clutching there - the judges view of what the documents mean may be very different to yours.

 

Bird in the hand and all that... make a counter offer and see ?

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

What else do they expect for their money? A confidentiality agreement? I would not wanting to sign that off as currently you have more leverage as you know the data exists so you can go to the ICO and they will get their earwigging made public even if you only get a token sum for their breaches of the DPA/GDPR.

 

All these things are a bit of a gamble, reject their settlement and if the tribunal awards you less then you pay their costs.

 

So how about asking for a copy of the documents and then evidence they have been destroyed as part of your settlement. That way any confidentiality clause becomes meaningless as long as you dont publish the ofending articles. Even haggling over these sorts of points will cost the employer a goodly sum in legal fees and as long as you dont negotiate in bad faith they will be hard pushed to withdraw from their current position without it harming them..

Edited by honeybee13
Paras, typos
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...