Does your condition meet the requirements of the 2010 Equality Act ? In order for your employer to be obliged to make reasonable adjustments you must meet the legal definition of what is a disability. The act says "a disability is a physical or mental impairment which has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on your ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities".

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 So surely their ET3 defence is no longer valid ?

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 ?

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 ?

Yes I think I might have to that for her. We did submit a SAR back in 2012 but they replied saying that they had no records to give us ! I also submitted a complaint through their own system which was upheld.

Hi It seems plain wrong that they can do that under the circumstances. Also, with it being a mortgage debt will it not stay on record for 12 years rather than the normal 6 ? The lender was Mortgage Express who by their own admission don't have the required information to pursue the debt but won't write it off or close the file.

Hi All, I'm hoping one of the very knowledgable people on here can help with this. Back in 2012 my sister was forced to surrender possession of her house as she simply couldn't afford it any longer and it was only a matter of time until the lender took possession. The lender subsequently sold the house for £115k and made a demand for the payment of a shortfall of just over £30k. I disputed this on her behalf on the basis that the lender had sold the house way under its true value, not just the fact that the exact same house next door sold 3 weeks later for £163k but also that a few weeks before she gave the house up another creditor was trying to get a charge on the house and had it valued at between £160k and £165k for court purposes. Notably, the estate agent who did that valuation report was the same one who subsequently sold it on behalf of the lender - the exact same branch in fact. After she received the demand from the lender I wrote to them requesting all the details of sale and the usual information such as marketing details, offers received, initial valuation report etc etc. After 3 months they wrote back saying they were unable to provide any of the information requested, to which I responded with a letter saying the debt was disputed until such time that they met their statutory duty to provide the requested information. She has never heard from them since in the last 5 years, and they have not issued any court proceedings or even passed it to a DCA. The debt is officially in dispute and they can't provide any proof of selling the property for the best possible price. she recently had to get credit checked as she needs to move to new privately rented accommodation and failed it. After registering with Noddle she was surprised to see that the lender had been registering a default every month since she handed back the house. I was under the impression, perhaps mistakenly, that creditors couldn't register defaults against disputed debts ? Not only is it disputed but it is totally unproven, especially given their admission that they can't provide any evidence re the sale and therefore haven't taken any recovery action whatsoever. 1. Are they allowed to register defaults in these circumstances ? 2. If not, how can she get them removed ? Thanks.

Could be a possible benefits fraud case though, depending on what the OP means by working "on the side".

The £20k cap doesn't apply to wasted costs orders where the claimant has behaved vexatiously or conducted themselves inappropriately, which appears to be the case here. Under those circumstances the ET can award the whole amount of wasted costs.

What is the basis of your appeal ? ET appeals are notoriously difficult as they can only be made on points of law or procedural errors. You can't appeal on the basis of "I can't afford it", you have to be able to demonstrate where the Tribunal has made an error under the law.

Aside from the obvious less than 2 years service issue, there is also the fact that while you may think it is a "his word against mine" case the harsh reality is that you will be surprised how quickly and readily his "colleagues" will give a witness statement to say they have witnessed warnings etc. Its not fair and its not just but you'd be foolish to think it doesn't happen in reality. Then it becomes his word against several others which is a different scenario altogether. Some of the allegations should be able to be proven or disproven quite easily. For example, the internet usage one is a cut and dried issue in most companies as the vast majority record the internet history of their employees and, unless you have IT administrator rights, you can't even delete the browsing history on your PC. If they do record the usage then they will have all the evidence they need - and it doesn't matter if someone else in the office was doing the same thing, that isn't a defence.

You can actually get your employment history by contacting HMRC, as they have records of which employers have been paying your NI contributions.

Actually, Manpower's TSA scheme takes 10% of whatever your total allowance is as a fee. The higher the figure, the higher their fee.

Surely they can not apply a levy against the motability car as she does not own it ? Motability cars are leased and ownership is retained by the Motability scheme, hence the lessee does not get given the V5 for the vehicle and all maintenance, tax and insurance costs are paid for by Motability. I'd be tempted to let them take the car and then report it as stolen.

Have they marked the correspondence as "Without Prejudice" ?

From what I can gather it was repossessed by an agent acting for the lender (not a bailiff) and was driven away from a communal car park at the flats where he lives. It seems that the lender retained the log book and a set of keys so simply drove it away !

A cousin of mine had his car repossessed by Moneybarn recently and he made a complaint to them which they have investigated. He gave me their response to read and something struck me as not right. In their written formal response they have stated that they repossessed the car on 11th October. A couple of paragraphs later they then say that a Default Notice was issued on 13th October. I was under the impression that a default notice had to be issued prior to repossession ? Can anyone confirm this and advise what he can do about it (if anything) ? Also, regarding the 1/3rd rule, does it apply to the full amount including arrangement and admin fees or is it 1/3rd of the actual loan ? His total to repay was £16,550 but he had repaid an amount that was agonisingly close to 1/3rd being just £84 short. However, the agreement included a total of £400 in admin fees so if they are discarded then he is over the 1/3rd mark and they should have needed a court order to repossess.

The key is to not to use constructive dismissal as the primary reason for the ET claim, configure it so that your claim is focused primarily on the discrimination aspect with a secondary element that it led to constructive dismissal as a consequence. Do not say "I am claiming constructive dismissal because of discrimination", instead say "I am claiming discrimination which also led to constructive dismissal". There is a subtle but important difference between the two in the context of the ET.

In exactly the same way, via an ET1 form to the tribunal. You can still say that the discrimination and bullying forced you into resignation (i.e. constructive dismissal) but I'd concentrate on the instances of discrimination as the key point of your complaint and make it clear that this is the basis of your claim. As an aside, discrimination compensation awards in the ET are on average higher than awards for unfair/constructive dismissal.

If you have been bullied and discriminated against then that is a much easier battle to fight in the ET, much more "winnable" than a constructive dismissal case. If you have proof of this, and are willing to go through the ET, then this is the route that I would pursue.

I think this is the most telling part. Seems to me that the manager has given the agency a different appraisal of your performance than the one she told you face to face. The fact she did not answer when you asked her if she'd said that your performance was not good speaks volumes I'm afraid.

I read recently that around 70% of S21 notices are rejected by the courts due to being incorrectly completed or other technicalities like no proof of service etc

Don't phone Eversheds, they simply want you to call so they can try and badger you into paying a lump sum immediately. They are not interested in "assisting" you at all, their duty is to their client not you.

I'm pretty sure that you can only use S21 to take possession at the end of the fixed term, i.e. giving at least 2 months notice to quit at the end of the AST fixed term. In order to get a tenant out during the AST fixed term you have to use S8 but can only do that if one of the specific grounds for regaining possession has been satisfied. If the tenant has a fixed term AST and has not given grounds for eviction under S8 then I'm afraid that you are not able to do much about it. Additionally, you can only use S21 if the tenant's deposit is registered in a secure scheme.

Am I missing something here - if you missed 2 months but the next month paid twice then surely you'd still be 1 month behind as by that time you'd have 2 months arrears plus current month payment, meaning 3 payments were due instead of 2 ?