Employment tribunal hearing coming up

[BazzaS]

Does the company have any CCJ’s prior to yours?

(if there is a degree of ‘left hand not knowing what the right is doing’, and it is their first CCJ : you might get sudden activity when “the right person” becomes aware.

If, instead, they are inveterate collectors of CCJ’s, then that lever won’t apply!)

[Lorenz]

My previous ccj was satisfied within the 30 days.

I don't know if they have others.

Strangely all mail from tribunal and courts are never received by them (so they say).

But even more strangely,  they receive mail when the game is up and they need to pay.

Can they restart the process in any way by claiming that they didn't receive the mail?

[FTMDave]

1 hour ago, Lorenz said:

Can they restart the process in any way by claiming that they didn't receive the mail?

Yes, they can, it's a very simple process, but consider ...

1.  It would cost them £275 which they'd never get refunded.

2.  They would have to convince the judge of a valid reason why they didn't defend.  The company changing premises and mail going to the old address for example would suffice.  Just saying "the letter didn't turn up guv" wouldn't wash.

3.  The judge would also want to know an outline of how they would defend a potential rematch.  The ICO judgements would put paid to that.

In fact it would be fun it they did try to set aside, it would just be another disaster for them. 

[Lorenz]

Hi everyone, 

Just a little update.

The bailiffs apparently visited the registered address and they said "there are no goods of value belonging to the Company at that address."

They suggested to re-issue the warrant at one of the other addresses where they run their business from.

Would I be throwing money away?

And in any case, can a warrant be issued at a different address from the one listed on the ccj?

I am thinking that they might be leasing everything,  including desks, chairs and computers and this is the reason for the bailiffs to go away empty handed.

what do you think?

They owe me around £350 all in.

Thanks

[FTMDave]

Sorry that you haven't had much help since Tuesday.  I'll flag this up to the Site Team.

Just one question first.  What's your financial position with the SAR cases, in the sense of (a) have much have you "made" from previous claims once costs are taken off and (b) how much have you shelved out in costs for the current claim including enforcement?

[Lorenz]

I'm up by about £70

[FTMDave]

I've flagged this up for Site Team members who, unlike me, are very knowledgeable about bailiff matters.

I'm sorry to be the bearer of bad news but it seems like the company have wheedled out of payment.

If a debt is over £600 it can be transferred from the county court to the high court and high court bailiffs can be sent in who are generally very effective.

Unfortunately you've stuck at county court level where the bailiffs will only do the bare minimum.

At least you're still £70 up on the deal.

Two things - have you ever told us the company name?

Also - did you ever check Trustonline to see about previous judgements?

 

 

[Lorenz]

Hi, I haven't said the company name because I still work for them and they already give me enough trouble as it is.

As said,  I received a response to a complaint to the bailiffs and they said that there are no goods of value belonging to the Company at that address.

Reading between the lines it seemed that was the end of it.

However,  yesterday I received a letter from the bailiffs saying that they made a first visit last week at the registered address and nobody from my employer's company was there.

As next step, they are now writing a letter to the defendant asking for payment. 

Which communication do I take in consideration?

The email or the letter?

[dx100uk]

if email preceded the letter......? then the letter.

 

 

 

[Lorenz]

The email came on the 23rd and the letter on 27th, so probably the letter was posted after the email?

[dx100uk]

yep.

can you go look on trustonline.org for previous judgements issued against the company name please.

this has been asked several times now.....IMPORTANT!!

 

 

[Lorenz]

Hi @dx100uk, sorry to ask, but what difference would it make if they had 1 or 100 ccj.

I'm trying to save the last penny in case they suddenly decide to sack me, so not keen on wasting money to know something that is no use to me.

They've sacked a colleague in another site and he's still awaiting tribunal date to recover his losses.

No warning, no disciplinary,  they called him in the office and told him he was sacked for bad performance after 25 years service (through 4 companies).

[BazzaS]

I don’t know dx’s reasoning, but I can think of at least 2 reasons:

a) if others have CCJ’s and been unable to enforce it suggests you might struggle too, and

b) if they already have tons of CCJ’s they likely won’t be impacted by one more.

if they don’t have any CCJ’s the relative impact on them of one is greater.

Edited January 30 by BazzaS

[Lorenz]

Hi everyone,  update:

I received a letter from the bailiffs saying that they visited the registered head office for the second and last time and confirmed that the company is not there.

So they have a false address on hmrc?

And how come they received the employment tribunal letters there?

Talking about shady companies...

[Nicky Boy]

Just now, Lorenz said:

Talking about shady companies...

And you're working for them... 

Would it be worth trying enforcement at the location you're working from?

Or, isn't there anything there either?

[Ethel Street]

15 minutes ago, Lorenz said:

I received a letter from the bailiffs saying that they visited the registered head office for the second and last time and confirmed that the company is not there.

So they have a false address on hmrc?

And how come they received the employment tribunal letters there?

 

It sounds like it may be the very common situation where a company's Registered Office is just a brass plate on the wall at the premises of  an accountant or business services company. The company has no actual operations or staff there, they just come in and pick there mail up from there. There would be no property of the company at the location so nothing baliffs could seize. 

Not fake or illegal. Companies don't have to operate from their Registered Office or be physically based there, it's just an address  "to which all communications and notices" can be sent.

[Lorenz]

@Nicky Boy I could re-submit the warrant at the location I work, but I'm starting to think that it is very likely they lease everything,  including pens and notebooks to avoid any payout. 

I'm not sure how to find out.

[Nicky Boy]

Leasing pens and notebooks seems a little extreme...

Are there any stickers or other telltale signs on the office equipment. PC's, printers, furniture, etc?

From earlier posts, I remember you mentioning that they complain about having to pay to recharge fire extinguishers, so they must own them at least. If that's the case, they must own other stuff in the building.

[Lorenz]

No stickers anywhere,  but all stuff was there when we were TUPEd over, so they either bought it from the previous company or they took over the contract with leasing companies. 

I don't know how things work, but I doubt the bailiffs would remove fire extinguishers. 

Got to investigate a bit and see if I can get any info.

Edited February 13 by Lorenz