Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Tonkers

The Endless Tribunal

Recommended Posts

I have to meet the HR guy the other side have employed to investigate my dismissal.

He appears to be unaware of all previous paperwork between the two sides to date.

Do I give him my documentary evidence that the accusations are false, or simply refer to it and save the documentation for the tribunal? (which has a confirmed date now)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to meet the HR guy the other side have employed to investigate my dismissal.

He appears to be unaware of all previous paperwork between the two sides to date.

Do I give him my documentary evidence that the accusations are false, or simply refer to it and save the documentation for the tribunal? (which has a confirmed date now)

He's probably pretending to be unaware to see what sort of evidence you have.

Me? I'd tell him ****** all until it counts knowing they'll just make up random, easily disprovable nonsense.

Unless there is some requirement to co-operate ofc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's probably pretending to be unaware to see what sort of evidence you have.

Me? I'd tell him ****** all until it counts knowing they'll just make up random, easily disprovable nonsense.

Unless there is some requirement to co-operate ofc.

I have to show cooperation :(

The ultimate result is that he advises the ex employer to settle, but if I go giving him my evidence they will have time to counter attack/make up more/improve the lies, in particular relating to dates and times.

So, reveal very little except my confidence in winning at the tribunal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to show cooperation :(

The ultimate result is that he advises the ex employer to settle, but if I go giving him my evidence they will have time to counter attack/make up more/improve the lies, in particular relating to dates and times.

So, reveal very little except my confidence in winning at the tribunal.

If it were me I'd....

"Lose" some of the evidence and find it later (because they will.)

And check exactly what sort of co-operation you have to show (because they will.)

Good luck with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to show cooperation :(

The ultimate result is that he advises the ex employer to settle, but if I go giving him my evidence they will have time to counter attack/make up more/improve the lies, in particular relating to dates and times.

So, reveal very little except my confidence in winning at the tribunal.

Tribunal Judges will generally expect each party to cooperate to see whether matters can be resolved outside the tribunal.

Has your case been listed for a tribunal hearing? I assume you have gone through an internal appeal procedure and at least used some of your evidence to support your case?

The Judge will instruct both parties to exchange witness statements at least 2 weeks before the hearing. Prior to this the respondent will be expected to put together the document bundle for the hearing. When I had mine the bundle was 2000 pages - the Council's Legal Exec dealing with it almost had a nervous breakdown :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tribunal Judges will generally expect each party to cooperate to see whether matters can be resolved outside the tribunal.

Has your case been listed for a tribunal hearing? I assume you have gone through an internal appeal procedure and at least used some of your evidence to support your case?

The Judge will instruct both parties to exchange witness statements at least 2 weeks before the hearing. Prior to this the respondent will be expected to put together the document bundle for the hearing. When I had mine the bundle was 2000 pages - the Council's Legal Exec dealing with it almost had a nervous breakdown :lol:

I have the hearing set. After much googling I cannot find a case which has been investigated after dismissal, and it looks like this will be deemed as time wasting and harassment.

I am going to lay a few red herrings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Worth looking at the sequence of dismissal , not just whatever the issue was , Most middle managers have very little formal training in employment law and HR , Quite often going straight to dismissal without following the proper procedure as stipulated in employment law , warnings written warnings etc . Are you in a union ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the hearing set. After much googling I cannot find a case which has been investigated after dismissal, and it looks like this will be deemed as time wasting and harassment.

I am going to lay a few red herrings.

If you were not offered an opportunity to appeal your dismissal then they are already in the realms of procedural unfair dismissal as they will be in contravention of the ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary Procedures

http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=2174

In the event the internal appeal finds your dismissal unfair there is the option to reinstate redeploy or negotiate.

It is likely that failure to follow the COP will result in a Procedural Unfair Dismissal finding at the Tribunal irrespective of whether or not your dismissal was justified. However if the Tribunal takes the view that the dismissal would have occured even if the procedure had been followed properly then any award will be limited to your wages for the time period it would have taken to undertake the investigation and hearing.

Polkey is the key case in this regard.

Key questions did they (your former employer) offer you an appeal hearing before or after the dismissal? Did you request an appeal hearing?

If you were not offered an opportunity to appeal your dismissal you are on good ground already. Even better if you asked and they refused.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don' trust HR they always side with the company and your bosses. I went through hell when I had a dispute with an employer. Be patient and always go in prepared the company will try to wait it out in the knowledge you don't have as much time. Good luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's probably pretending to be unaware to see what sort of evidence you have.

Me? I'd tell him ****** all until it counts knowing they'll just make up random, easily disprovable nonsense.

Unless there is some requirement to co-operate ofc.

I would go further than that and feed him surreptiously a little disinformation that they cannot prove and let them try to use it against you.When it all falls apart their case will be damaged.I caught an HR man a real pearler by this method when I left my last job.It was 1977 mind,so they may have wised up since then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don' trust HR they always side with the company and your bosses. I went through hell when I had a dispute with an employer. Be patient and always go in prepared the company will try to wait it out in the knowledge you don't have as much time. Good luck.

Everytime without exception

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to meet the HR guy the other side have employed to investigate my dismissal.

He appears to be unaware of all previous paperwork between the two sides to date.

Do I give him my documentary evidence that the accusations are false, or simply refer to it and save the documentation for the tribunal? (which has a confirmed date now)

Bump - any updates Tonkers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bump

Any updates Tonkers?

Did you have the meeting with the HR turd?

Yes I did, accompanied by an ex work colleague (who was also badly treated and resigned shortly before I was fired).

We took an intense three hours of his expensive time.

I asked him about holding an investigation six months after the dismissal so he re-titled it a re-hearing (ha! there was no original hearing).

Anyway he was professional enough. I directed him towards the allegations made about supposed incidents in 2007 and 2009 that form a large part of the dismissal as I know this will not go down well with the tribunal (gross misconduct over 2 years after the alleged incident?) and it has widened the scope of who he has to interview, including one particularly nasty character. (The look of horror on my ex-colleagues face when she was reminded of his actions was a genuine picture). I indicated my evidence but did not produce it, and he did ask.

I mentioned the abuses of the MD, and I am happy to know that he will squirm when questioned by the HR guy.

It is a strain to know that this man is off interviewing people, who will no doubt make further allegations, but I also know that straight up lying to this man will be difficult for them, as he will also ask them for their evidence, dates and times.

He has stated that he will be going through all of my email correspondence from work, which is excellent, as it proves my good character and extraordinary work load.

Another positive is that when I discussed with my solicitors getting the special particulars (information I require from the other side to build my case further) we did not do it, as it was too expensive for me. But as part of this HR guys report, he has to gather all the information I requested, so I now get it for free (in fact the other side are paying for it!).

I think the man will write a balanced report (to do otherwise would damage their case further) and may find the only option is to paint a picture of a breakdown in relationships in the company, which I have indicated were general and not personal.

I made the points about the destruction of my career and finances very pertinent. I am actually now leaving that industry as a result of this.

Out of interest, how easy do people think it will be for them to continue lying under this pressure? The meeting was easy for me as I do not have to remember my 'story' so repeated questioning on salient points is a breeze.

On re-reading the grounds of resistance I found another doozy, according to them I was formally orally warned about an incident three days before it was alleged!

My replacement was hired a full week before I was fired, but also this same person resigned from his job (as a result of my behaviour he states) a full day before I am told he was employed! That is just how crazy this is.

I take heart that the bulk of this really is about procedure, not only was there none, but they have not even been able to lie about it without getting so clearly mixed up. They have also submitted their confused ramblings to the tribunal already, so there is no chance for the HR guy to prevent that or take it back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I did, accompanied by an ex work colleague (who was also badly treated and resigned shortly before I was fired).

We took an intense three hours of his expensive time.

I asked him about holding an investigation six months after the dismissal so he re-titled it a re-hearing (ha! there was no original hearing).

Anyway he was professional enough. I directed him towards the allegations made about supposed incidents in 2007 and 2009 that form a large part of the dismissal as I know this will not go down well with the tribunal (gross misconduct over 2 years after the alleged incident?) and it has widened the scope of who he has to interview, including one particularly nasty character. (The look of horror on my ex-colleagues face when she was reminded of his actions was a genuine picture). I indicated my evidence but did not produce it, and he did ask.

I mentioned the abuses of the MD, and I am happy to know that he will squirm when questioned by the HR guy.

It is a strain to know that this man is off interviewing people, who will no doubt make further allegations, but I also know that straight up lying to this man will be difficult for them, as he will also ask them for their evidence, dates and times.

He has stated that he will be going through all of my email correspondence from work, which is excellent, as it proves my good character and extraordinary work load.

Another positive is that when I discussed with my solicitors getting the special particulars (information I require from the other side to build my case further) we did not do it, as it was too expensive for me. But as part of this HR guys report, he has to gather all the information I requested, so I now get it for free (in fact the other side are paying for it!).

I think the man will write a balanced report (to do otherwise would damage their case further) and may find the only option is to paint a picture of a breakdown in relationships in the company, which I have indicated were general and not personal.

I made the points about the destruction of my career and finances very pertinent. I am actually now leaving that industry as a result of this.

Out of interest, how easy do people think it will be for them to continue lying under this pressure? The meeting was easy for me as I do not have to remember my 'story' so repeated questioning on salient points is a breeze.

On re-reading the grounds of resistance I found another doozy, according to them I was formally orally warned about an incident three days before it was alleged!

My replacement was hired a full week before I was fired, but also this same person resigned from his job (as a result of my behaviour he states) a full day before I am told he was employed! That is just how crazy this is.

I take heart that the bulk of this really is about procedure, not only was there none, but they have not even been able to lie about it without getting so clearly mixed up. They have also submitted their confused ramblings to the tribunal already, so there is no chance for the HR guy to prevent that or take it back.

Interesting. It would appear there is already a procedural unfair dismissal as a result of not undertaking a hearing before dismissing you. This would appear to be a summary dismissal. However in the event the tribunal agrees that your dismissal was justified any compo will be limited to the wages paid during the period the matter would have been investigated over.

- see Polkey v A E Dayton Services for case precedent.

The other stuff you describe will no doubt help your case.

Are you just going for unfair dismissal or do you have a section 105 descrimination claim as well? Discrimination harder to prove but awards much higher than straight UF dismissal.

Also watch out for the old - you havent done enough to mitigate their losses trick. This really is the heads we win, tails you lose for the employee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I did, accompanied by an ex work colleague (who was also badly treated and resigned shortly before I was fired).

We took an intense three hours of his expensive time.

I asked him about holding an investigation six months after the dismissal so he re-titled it a re-hearing (ha! there was no original hearing).

Anyway he was professional enough. I directed him towards the allegations made about supposed incidents in 2007 and 2009 that form a large part of the dismissal as I know this will not go down well with the tribunal (gross misconduct over 2 years after the alleged incident?) and it has widened the scope of who he has to interview, including one particularly nasty character. (The look of horror on my ex-colleagues face when she was reminded of his actions was a genuine picture). I indicated my evidence but did not produce it, and he did ask.

I mentioned the abuses of the MD, and I am happy to know that he will squirm when questioned by the HR guy.

It is a strain to know that this man is off interviewing people, who will no doubt make further allegations, but I also know that straight up lying to this man will be difficult for them, as he will also ask them for their evidence, dates and times.

He has stated that he will be going through all of my email correspondence from work, which is excellent, as it proves my good character and extraordinary work load.

Another positive is that when I discussed with my solicitors getting the special particulars (information I require from the other side to build my case further) we did not do it, as it was too expensive for me. But as part of this HR guys report, he has to gather all the information I requested, so I now get it for free (in fact the other side are paying for it!).

I think the man will write a balanced report (to do otherwise would damage their case further) and may find the only option is to paint a picture of a breakdown in relationships in the company, which I have indicated were general and not personal.

I made the points about the destruction of my career and finances very pertinent. I am actually now leaving that industry as a result of this.

Out of interest, how easy do people think it will be for them to continue lying under this pressure? The meeting was easy for me as I do not have to remember my 'story' so repeated questioning on salient points is a breeze.

On re-reading the grounds of resistance I found another doozy, according to them I was formally orally warned about an incident three days before it was alleged!

My replacement was hired a full week before I was fired, but also this same person resigned from his job (as a result of my behaviour he states) a full day before I am told he was employed! That is just how crazy this is.

I take heart that the bulk of this really is about procedure, not only was there none, but they have not even been able to lie about it without getting so clearly mixed up. They have also submitted their confused ramblings to the tribunal already, so there is no chance for the HR guy to prevent that or take it back.

If you know their position is full of lies it is likely they will be inconsistent. Usually the higher up the greasy pole the greater the willingness to lie under oath. I have seen it in tribunals, health and safety prosecutions, food safety prosecutions, interviews under caution, licensing reviews etc etc. If they can be shown to be lying then they will lose all credibility before the tribunal. Equally DO NOT be tempted to spice up your case as I have seen claimants blow it on the back of embelished cases.

Key tip for when you are in the witness box - don't get flustered if their Barrister focusses in on some minor misdemeanour on your part. If it happened just acknowledge it happened (in the heat of the moment etc) and this gives them nowhere to go.

Also take your time. Most Barristers know witnesses are desperate to get out of the witness box so they pile on the pressure and the witness goes to pieces. Don't allow yourself to be pressured into yes / no answers - this is oppressive questioning.

Out of Interest what sort of company is this - big / small / sector?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting. It would appear there is already a procedural unfair dismissal as a result of not undertaking a hearing before dismissing you. This would appear to be a summary dismissal. However in the event the tribunal agrees that your dismissal was justified any compo will be limited to the wages paid during the period the matter would have been investigated over.

- see Polkey v A E Dayton Services for case precedent.

The other stuff you describe will no doubt help your case.

Are you just going for unfair dismissal or do you have a section 105 descrimination claim as well? Discrimination harder to prove but awards much higher than straight UF dismissal.

Also watch out for the old - you havent done enough to mitigate their losses trick. This really is the heads we win, tails you lose for the employee.

What does that mean with wages if I am being investigated now, six months after the dismissal (I was called into a room and handed a 'confirmation of dismissal' with no discussion, the disciplinary hearing was supposed to have happened 2 days before, a fact entirely made up, I was not even in the office!).

We are going for wrongful dismissal and unfair dismissal. It will be very difficult to justify my dismissal on grounds of gross misconduct due to the nature and historical period of events. Gross misconduct is really used when someone needs to be escorted off the premises immediately so citing alleged events from 2007, 2009 and over a month before are problematic to say the least.

In over 3 years I was not given any oral or written warnings about this gross misconduct, how will they explain that?

The MD can also show no attempts to mediate the perceived situation, he did not make best efforts to avoid firing me.

I can definitely show I have done the utmost to mitigate my loss, including taking a job, that didn't work out, but I also have evidence of the company's continued slander of me to people in the industry, which has affected my ability to get a new job. I can show continued malice and vindictiveness which will shed light on the real reasons for my dismissal: a petulant, jealous MD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you know their position is full of lies it is likely they will be inconsistent. Usually the higher up the greasy pole the greater the willingness to lie under oath. I have seen it in tribunals, health and safety prosecutions, food safety prosecutions, interviews under caution, licensing reviews etc etc. If they can be shown to be lying then they will lose all credibility before the tribunal. Equally DO NOT be tempted to spice up your case as I have seen claimants blow it on the back of embelished cases.

Key tip for when you are in the witness box - don't get flustered if their Barrister focusses in on some minor misdemeanour on your part. If it happened just acknowledge it happened (in the heat of the moment etc) and this gives them nowhere to go.

Also take your time. Most Barristers know witnesses are desperate to get out of the witness box so they pile on the pressure and the witness goes to pieces. Don't allow yourself to be pressured into yes / no answers - this is oppressive questioning.

Out of Interest what sort of company is this - big / small / sector?

Very good points indeed, there is a temptation to overstate, a route they have certainly followed.

I held up for three hours but I could feel myself getting exhausted and emotional at the end, so I should get some practice in, particularly about the yes / no questioning. Good tip thank you.

It was a tiny company of six people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What does that mean with wages if I am being investigated now, six months after the dismissal (I was called into a room and handed a 'confirmation of dismissal' with no discussion, the disciplinary hearing was supposed to have happened 2 days before, a fact entirely made up, I was not even in the office!).

We are going for wrongful dismissal and unfair dismissal. It will be very difficult to justify my dismissal on grounds of gross misconduct due to the nature and historical period of events. Gross misconduct is really used when someone needs to be escorted off the premises immediately so citing alleged events from 2007, 2009 and over a month before are problematic to say the least.

In over 3 years I was not given any oral or written warnings about this gross misconduct, how will they explain that?

The MD can also show no attempts to mediate the perceived situation, he did not make best efforts to avoid firing me.

I can definitely show I have done the utmost to mitigate my loss, including taking a job, that didn't work out, but I also have evidence of the company's continued slander of me to people in the industry, which has affected my ability to get a new job. I can show continued malice and vindictiveness which will shed light on the real reasons for my dismissal: a petulant, jealous MD.

The Wrongful Dismissal would cover lost wages in your notice period?

They will look ridiculous claiming multiple incidences of gross misconduct without any evidence of disciplinary hearings for the earlier 'events'. Anything constituting GM and found to be the case would as a minimum warrant a formal written warning. Reading between the lines am I correct in thinking their claim is that you bullied other staff?

As for slander - well if you can prove that the County Court is the place to go .

Good luck :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very good points indeed, there is a temptation to overstate, a route they have certainly followed.

I held up for three hours but I could feel myself getting exhausted and emotional at the end, so I should get some practice in, particularly about the yes / no questioning. Good tip thank you.

It was a tiny company of six people.

Take a look at the bundle and try to establish how you would question yourself if you were the Barrister representing the Respondent. Remember they can only use material from the bundle so try and identify your weak spots. Then think about how you would answer each question. Don't get strung out on minor misdemeanours - best approach is to acknowledge them - no one is perfect, etc etc. This leaves the Barrister with nowhere to go. If you go all into denial mode this is what they want.

Having a clear and concise answer will do you no harm and the Judges appreciate honesty from the claimant. Waterworks might work in your favour if it is a male judge and the performance is convincing otherwise it could backfire.

I managed to predict 8 out of 10 questions in my hearing. My dad who was watching and reckoned objective I beat the Barrister on 8 and we drew on 2 :lol:

Which venue is your hearing going to take place - Stratford?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Wrongful Dismissal would cover lost wages in your notice period?

They will look ridiculous claiming multiple incidences of gross misconduct without any evidence of disciplinary hearings for the earlier 'events'. Anything constituting GM and found to be the case would as a minimum warrant a formal written warning. Reading between the lines am I correct in thinking their claim is that you bullied other staff?

As for slander - well if you can prove that the County Court is the place to go .

Good luck :)

I was dismissed with the promise of two months pay, which they never paid.

Yes, it's rudeness and aggression, as they term it, but as they accused me of these incidents on days when I was not present, they are going to look quite bad.

I am happy with the slander strengthening my case if necessary, I do want to avoid putting professional acquaintances through any court appearances on my behalf.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was dismissed with the promise of two months pay, which they never paid.

Yes, it's rudeness and aggression, as they term it, but as they accused me of these incidents on days when I was not present, they are going to look quite bad.

I am happy with the slander strengthening my case if necessary, I do want to avoid putting professional acquaintances through any court appearances on my behalf.

Quite - I think many employers rely on the fact that so few employees challenge them. The fookwit Council I used to work for were dismissing admin staff unfairly (i reckoned 16 during the period in question). However the spineless union wouldn't challenge the Council so they got away with it - except the one case where I represented - and that cost the Shitty Council £23K in compo alone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite - I think many employers rely on the fact that so few employees challenge them. The fookwit Council I used to work for were dismissing admin staff unfairly (i reckoned 16 during the period in question). However the spineless union wouldn't challenge the Council so they got away with it - except the one case where I represented - and that cost the Shitty Council £23K in compo alone

Good on you!

The MD left me choice but to clear my name in a public tribunal.

I have also raised the spectre of harassment to the HR Guy to keep the pressure on, referring to a formal complaint I made about the nasty character. This also shows I know procedure and have been professional throughout, a vague email by a staff member is not a formal grievance. Worse this email says in writing that it was written at the MD's request.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 145 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.