Fairly urgent - tribunal advice needed

[kingofrod]

Hiya! Thanks for the reply.

 

I have the bundle, yes, but I'm not sure what you mean by "agreed" it? They sent some more documents through a few days ago that have been added and then when they sent documents through that I had requested, they didn't automatically add them to the bundle so I've done so myself and will email them through to the respondent's solicitor later and ask them to add them.

 

Also, when the further information I'm awaiting comes through, I'd expect to have this added, too. One of the emails I have now been sent, as requested, does show that when I have asked for specific time off previously it had been granted but that I was given no notification of that fact. One of the points I'm fighting them on is that my absense shouldn't have been 'unauthorised' as I hadn't been told that I couldn't have the leave, which I'd always previously been told. I was simply ignored when I asked for time off which had, in the past, meant I'd been given the leave as requested.

 

So I hope the emails I'm waiting for will further clarify that point.

 

Do you not feel it's reasonable, what they've proposed, considering they have left open the ability to alter statements based SOLELY on the new documents that I am being sent?

 

Thanks heaps

[lbruk]

ok, well the bundle has to be agreed by you as this is the documentation that the tribunal judge will refer to during the tribunal, also your witness statement should refer to the page numbers where your supporting evidence is referred to.

 

for example

 

the manager wrote me a letter saying i had been made redundant [45]

 

this letter would then be on page 45 of the bundle.

 

so the witness statement and the bundle are kind of intertwined.

[kingofrod]

Hiya! Thanks - that's exactly what I have on the go! My statement is peppered with (bundle page 134, para 6) etc.

 

The statement is as confusing as sin though! It appears to jump from one subject to another in order to keep it in chronological order.

 

Is that OK?

 

Thanks again

[lbruk]

the other way to do it is to take one problem at a time and then give the chronology of that one thing. There is no right or wrong way, the important thing is to make sure that you are comfortable reading the statement.

 

If the respondent is continually adding to the bundle then how is your statement ever finished? as you may want to refer to those documents.

 

I would say you want 2 things.

 

1. The bundle gets agreed and stays as it is.

2. You swap statements after the bundle is completely agreed in the terms of fairness.

[kingofrod]

Sounds like excellent advice. I think I'll wait to get the paperwork that's currently outstanding then ask to finalise the bundle.

 

They've failed to adhere to their own timescales a few times, so I'm really hopeful that'll help my case.

[lbruk]

well to be honest, their timescales are not your concern! the timescale of the tribunal is what is important to adhere too.

[kingofrod]

LOL - you're absolutely right. I recognise that.

 

Can I assume you've been through a Tribunal? Does one just read out his/her statement on the day and then be questioned on it? How do these things tend to run? I've still not been able to get into a tribunal near me

[lbruk]

I haven't been through a tribunal yet, but i am in the process of going though one for constructive dismissal, disability discrimination, harassment and gender discrimination. I have my CMD next month but the hearing isn't until August.

 

I've just read lots of things and taken lots of advice and as i am representing myself i like to know everything I've already annoyed their solicitor by picking him up on spelling mistakes and errors which is fun! I'm just enjoying making them run around after me!

 

You need to make sure things are done at your pace and in the right order, because the moment you don't do something right they'll jump on you and blame you for everything!

[kingofrod]

Hello all. Apologies for my absense and lack of updates.

 

Anyway, here's where I am at the moment. Wonder if anyone has any further thoughts?

 

------------------------------

 

1) I've heard nothing from the respondent about applying for costs. I would have thought they'd have had to go to a PHR by now had they wanted to go for costs?

 

2) About two weeks ago I requested some documentation from the respondent and this information has still not been provided in full. Some information was provided, and it helped show that what I was saying was accurate (in that I had made an unofficial request for time off and it was granted, although I was not advised - the time off simply appeared on my company rostering system), but further evidence still hasn't come. We delayed the exchange of statements twice to allow more time for this information to be provided but, ultimately, agreed to exchange without it on the understanding that I could change my statement only to refer to this new information.

 

3) I wrote my statement and drew reference to some of the information provided above (point two) that was NOT in the bundle as the bundle was provided prior to the receipt of this new information. I sent the respondent an updated table of contents and numbered appropriately the pages to which I was referring. They've said that they "control the bundle" and will add the pages when they update it with this further new information (that I'm waiting for). This worries me, as my statement refers to page numbers in the bundle that may not actually now be accurate, if they put the new information elsewhere in the bundle.

 

4) I'm waiting to hear from the ET whether they'll approve a flight for me and two nights' accommodation, as I live too far from the hearing to drive it, and certainly too far to commute each day. Are they normally quite agreeable to such requests?

 

5) As I've said in my statement of loss that I've not really lost anything (can I update this? The new job I've taken is paying less than I'd expected so I'm down about £500.00+ a month) and the respondent has said in their statements that they do not feel it would be appropriate to reinstate me due to the breakdown of trust between the two parties, CAN the court order the return of the employee benefits I've previously mentioned? The employee discount in the respondent's stores, that is, that I'd have been entitled to for a period equal to my tenure with them after my leaving?

 

Thanks so much again, as always.

[becky2585]

1) No, this is usually done at the end of the matter.

 

2) Have you made an application to the ET for an order for specific disclosure? That should get them moving.

 

3) Yes, that's normal practice, although they should amend the Index according to your request... I wouldn't worry though, if your numbers are wrong you can redirect the ET to the correct pages on the day.

 

4) I'd say you have a snowballs chance in hell of that bring granted, sorry! Why is the ET so far away?

 

5) No, they can't order benefits to be reinstated, but they could pay you in lieu of lost benefits. You could also claim the difference in lost earnings if you update your schedule of loss accordingly.

[kingofrod]

1) No, this is usually done at the end of the matter.

Ah. I see. Well I don't believe that I've acted unreasonably in persuing this claim and I'd hope an ET would find the same, so I guess I have little to worry about.

2) Have you made an application to the ET for an order for specific disclosure? That should get them moving.

Not yet. We appeared to be progressing fairly reasonably without it. Should I contact the respondent again asking for the documentation or go straight to the ET this time with the disclosure order?

3) Yes, that's normal practice, although they should amend the Index according to your request... I wouldn't worry though, if your numbers are wrong you can redirect the ET to the correct pages on the day.

Ok. Thanks. They sent me about ten new pages of documentation and only three or four were relevant, but I added them all to keep them in context. I then amended the table of contents accordingly, which they disregarded.

 

I shall persue the additional information I've requested - will it reflect badly on them at all that they appear to be witholding information? - and will then seek to have the ToC updated.

 

4) I'd say you have a snowballs chance in hell of that bring granted, sorry! Why is the ET so far away?

My official place of employment was in the South. I live in the North West.

 

You think they'd say no to the accommodation, too? I'm just working from this document : http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/forms/tribunals/employment/ExpensesAllowances.pdf

 

Thanks again, oh wise and wonderful one!

[kingofrod]

5) No, they can't order benefits to be reinstated, but they could pay you in lieu of lost benefits. You could also claim the difference in lost earnings if you update your schedule of loss accordingly.

If I update the SoL, to whom do I have to send it? How detailed can it get? I mean, I used to get a petrol allowance from the employer and now I don't get that PLUS my commute has gone from twice a week to five times a week, so I'm spending lots more on transportation. I'm spending more time at home as I used to be on the road, so my cost of living has increased greatly. Not to mention the difference in salary, of course.

 

But all that said, what I want is my employee discount returned. It's good for me, it's good for them. I don't see why they're being so obstructive. Well, OK, I do. But I don't understand why they feel the need to be.

[assisted blonde]

Bit late joining this but wanted to clarify a couple of things, at the start of the posting you said Uncle but a bit later on you said mother and referred to her? was this just a typo?

Also looking at it from the employers side you had originally applied to take Aug and Sept off but only August was granted. You were needed at home from the start of Sept? and while you were at home looking after your relative you were enquiring about travel costs/flights for a friend?

I am not saying I dont belive you but it does look a bit convienient and that is somthing your employer may have thought.

If you have covered these points in previous posts I apologise I may have missed them

[kingofrod]

Bit late joining this but wanted to clarify a couple of things, at the start of the posting you said Uncle but a bit later on you said mother and referred to her? was this just a typo?

Also looking at it from the employers side you had originally applied to take Aug and Sept off but only August was granted. You were needed at home from the start of Sept? and while you were at home looking after your relative you were enquiring about travel costs/flights for a friend?

I am not saying I dont belive you but it does look a bit convienient and that is somthing your employer may have thought.

If you have covered these points in previous posts I apologise I may have missed them

Hiya AB. It was my uncle. Apologies - typo.

 

I understand that a lot of the timings involved in this one are dodgy.... My uncle having his fall at a time when I was applying for time off anyway, the fact that I was pricing flights (even though these were never actually booked, paid for, confirmed or ticketed). BUT is it fair for a company to disregard a letter from my uncle's GP saying that I needed to take time off? Is it fair that they disregard statements from my uncle and his wife, saying I was needed at home to provide care? I know these letters came after the decision to dismiss, but it's not an irreversible decision and I think they should be taking them into account.

 

Additionally, isn't it fair to argue that I wouldn't have used the IN HOUSE TRAVEL COMPANY to research flight information had I been trying to be deceptive? I'd have to be an idiot to not expect them to use that against me.

[sido]

the comments was outside work ,so the court should not take in consideration and thecomments was out of time simple as that

[kingofrod]

Sorry? What comment was outside of work?

[sido]

anythings hapened outside work ,it mean anythings .they cant suck you if you do somthings outside work because the company have no right to get invoved in any probleme ouside work ,so they dissmised you illigaly

[kingofrod]

Well I'm not entirely sure that's accurate, unfortunately. Unfortunately, employers are allowed to use social networking against you if you've made comments that have brought their name into disrepute; however wrong their ability to do so might be.

[sido]

wrong they have no right , and beleive me , because it hapend to me...

[kingofrod]

That's interesting, thanks. Can you provide more information on your case, please?

 

Cheers

[sido]

i cant give more information about my case sory because is realy similar to your case

[kingofrod]

Have you been to tribunal yet? Are you going to tribunal?

[assisted blonde]

Hi I understand what you are saying I was just commenting that it could be viewed in a suspicious way.

 

Sido you are not entirely accurate that your employer cannot take into account what you do outside of work , if your actions could bring your company into disrepute/criminal offences/actions that would bring you into a conflict of interest etc then they can.

[sido]

yes i went to the trubunal and i won my case against the perpetrators...back to work and got 150.000 pounds componsation ,just be calm and look propely to the investigation and you will find definitly a mistake from them and you can use it against theme and spesialy when they took to much time to raised against you and any complain against you ,it should be by writing otherwise you can argue that it was a polt against you

[kingofrod]

Hi I understand what you are saying I was just commenting that it could be viewed in a suspicious way.

No, I agree entirely. I've said to them myself in my hearings/interviews that I recognise the unfortunate timing of a number of things. I don't think it's fair or appropriate, however, for an employer to dismiss an employee of eight years exemplary service for "coincidental timing".

yes i went to the trubunal and i won my case against the perpetrators...back to work and got 150.000 pounds componsation ,just be calm and look propely to the investigation and you will find definitly a mistake from them and you can use it against theme and spesialy when they took to much time to raised against you and any complain against you ,it should be by writing otherwise you can argue that it was a polt against you

Who were your solicitors?! I want them! Edited April 15, 2012 by kingofrod