I thought bad references were illegal?!

SarEl

bristol_pilot wrote: »

One might think so, but not quite correct. A statement might be literally true, but give a misleading impression and be defamatory. For example, a reference might say: 'no customer complaints were ever upheld against this candidate'. If the true situation is that there never were any complaints, then the statement is literally true but gives a misleading and potentially defamatory impression. This is one reason why writing a negative reference is so dangerous. Another reason is that, in a defamation action, the onus is on the defendant to prove that the allegation is true. So if a true statement is made that 'the candidate was at least 10 minutes late at least 3 days a week', the writer had better have the records to prove it or they are lilely to lose a defamation case.

No-win no-fee is potentially available for defamation caes and damages as well as costs can be substantial, so reference-writers beware!

Yes. But it doesn't take much reading between the lines here, does it? The OP was "let-go" (dismissed) on "trumped up charges" ( after a disciplinary hearing at which s/he was found to have committed the alleged misconduct). And the first the new employer knew about the dismissal was when the reference came in and stated that the OP had been dismissed, or when they refused to give a reference (which is also classed as an unsatisfactory reference).

If they were "trumped up charges" then the OP could have appealed, could have claimed unfair dismissal (assuming they had 12 months employment) - or could have told the new employer the truth and explained why the dismissal was unfair. Instead the OP relied on the mistaken belief that the previous employer couldn't mention anything negative. Surely by now most people have realised that a reference can mention you were dismissed if that is what happened?

paddyrg

Andy_L wrote: »

if its truthful then, by definition, it can't be defamation

If I call Bob Crow a ****, surely that is both?

prowla

paddyrg wrote: »

If I call Bob Crow a ****, surely that is both?

A star ????

jaymo2010

In relation to the recommendations here to make a Subject Access Request, I recommend having a look at the ICO website as there is some relevant information here about the references and Subject Access Requests - and they may have reason not to provide you with the reference that you're seeking.

Please be aware that even if the reference is provided to you, that the company have 40 calendar days to provide you with the information (from receipt of the request in writing with the any fee that they may wish to charge - upto £10). You don't have to quote any Acts in your letter or even say why you want the information, just say that you want to see all personal data held about you, particularly any references they may hold.

It may be worth contacting the company that provided the reference initially to see if they'll let you have sight of it, although if you left on bad terms they may not be too co-operative.

kiwi07

I've just lost a job offer due to bad reference. I've received a job offer which was subject to satisfactory references. I left my previous employer at bad terms, did not get on with my manager who didn't like me from day one. I tried my best but just could not please my boss. I was on 6 months probationary which I failed... I did not put my ex employer as a referee but my potential employer insisted in receiving a reference from my ex boss.... As the result of this their offer was withdrawn.... Awful...

bigpound

Employers can only put negative things which have been documented somewhere, like number of ill days.

If they write negative things they can't back up with hard evidence, then it leaves them exposed to legal problems.

So by the sounds of it, this issue you speak of was most likely put under the one of the common reference type questions 'Would you employee this person again? If no please state why' or 'Did the employee have any warnings issued against them' lines.

kiwi07

bigpound wrote: »

Employers can only put negative things which have been documented somewhere, like number of ill days.

If they write negative things they can't back up with hard evidence, then it leaves them exposed to legal problems.

So by the sounds of it, this issue you speak of was most likely put under the one of the common reference type questions 'Would you employee this person again? If no please state why' or 'Did the employee have any warnings issued against them' lines.

Do they have a right to say "No, would not employ again"?

LadyMissA

oki1875 wrote: »

Do they have a right to say "No, would not employ again"?

some may put no as it's policy not to re employ

kiwi07

LadyMissA wrote: »

some may put no as it's policy not to re employ

This is just nasty. If they have nothing good to say why dont they just leave it blank... It can ruin someone's future.

LadyMissA

oki1875 wrote: »

This is just nasty. If they have nothing good to say why dont they just leave it blank... It can ruin someone's future.

Well you would hope they would put why as in its not company policy to do so etc