What can I claim for in a wronful dismissal claim.

anamenottaken

tigeress289 wrote: »

Thanks, I canot fault your post and as I said earlier, there are fantastic people on here. I fully understand the hierarcy of the court system and yes the county court is not technically a precedent hotspot, but it is a stating place. The real justice point is so true. I believe that I have clearly been discriminated against, time limit for that is 3 months, the school mislead me for 5. I will still put it in , I will still put in I believe my human rights have been violated. More than likely laughed at but it will be included. If I lost its civil appeal court but I am trying. I have a website up and so far the heads resigned, the HR head has gone. I am the tip of an iceberg in the authority I live. 66 compromise agreements issued. I personally know one teacher who had a nervous breakdown with how the HR treated them. They only had to pay me 1 weeks money in leu and I could not have done a thing. I take on board everything you say and you are so right. If I could have got this higher up the ladder I would have but the authority hid behind the school and I can only go after them.
thanks again

What sort of discrimination are you claiming? Is it something from which one is protected by law?

Uncertain

Notmyrealname wrote: »

...... You need a Crown Court to do that. The costs of legal representation for such a case would probably cost you more than a whole years wage.

The CROWN Court deals with criminal matters, not civil ones like this.

You mean the Appeal court, which in this case would be the first place to go with an appeal from the County court - but that could only be made on a point of law.

http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/you-and-the-judiciary/appeals-process#headingAnchor3

HiToAll

tigeress289 wrote: »

Firstly, Thank you all for such speedy help. A year ago I asked here, if I had a claim for wrongful dismissal as an employee. I worked at a school as the site manager and on starting filled in a CRB, which I declared I had a previous conviction. I was list 99 at the same time and cleared. I carried out my duties and it was said I achieved more in 5 months than in the previous 7 years. The local authority HR threatened the head to dismiss me after it came across my CRB. No warning and I was gone. 1 year on, I have just served the pre action notice as I was misled for 5 months that I would be getting the job back. In the year since I have uncovered quite a lot and have got some good results. The next step is to file the summons as I need to win, to set a precedent on employment law. I am about to fill in my claim form and need to know if there are any damages I can claim for. thanks

What is a List 99 and cleared, and did that have anything to do with why you were dismissed?

mildred1978

tigeress289 wrote: »

Firstly, Thank you all for such speedy help. A year ago I asked here, if I had a claim for wrongful dismissal as an employee. I worked at a school as the site manager and on starting filled in a CRB, which I declared I had a previous conviction. I was list 99 at the same time and cleared. I carried out my duties and it was said I achieved more in 5 months than in the previous 7 years. The local authority HR threatened the head to dismiss me after it came across my CRB. No warning and I was gone. 1 year on, I have just served the pre action notice as I was misled for 5 months that I would be getting the job back. In the year since I have uncovered quite a lot and have got some good results. The next step is to file the summons as I need to win, to set a precedent on employment law. I am about to fill in my claim form and need to know if there are any damages I can claim for. thanks

If you were on list 99 you should not have been given a job in a school under any circumstances whatsoever, no matter how well you worked.

Those on list 99 are serious sex offenders (convicted) and banñed from working in schools full stop.

HiToAll

mildred1978 wrote: »

If you were on list 99 you should not have been given a job in a school under any circumstances whatsoever, no matter how well you worked.

Those on list 99 are serious sex offenders (convicted) and banñed from working in schools full stop.

Oh dear I see, thanks

Two4Tuesday

mildred1978 wrote: »

If you were on list 99 you should not have been given a job in a school under any circumstances whatsoever, no matter how well you worked.

Those on list 99 are serious sex offenders (convicted) and banñed from working in schools full stop.

I think the OP is stating that while they declared a conviction, it was not a list99 conviction as they were checked for list99 and cleared.

Dunroamin

I thought a link to the earlier thread might be useful.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/46071401#Comment_46071401

dizzyrascal

Dunroamin wrote: »

I thought a link to the earlier thread might be useful.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/46071401#Comment_46071401

Thanks for the very useful link Dunromin.
Interesting background reading to this thread.

tigeress289

Firstly, thanks for the Link Dunroamin, I have not got a clue how to do that.
Couple of points, the list 99 contains offences and persons who would be barred from working in a school, discrimination is discrimination. In employment law, having a criminal record is not on the list but CIPD warn that this point will be argued in the future. Their own guide lines would have alowed me to keep working. Most Legal advice says you cannot use human rights but some do. The hardest thing is getting it into a court that counts. The HR threatened the school but the local authority guide lines clearly states it was the heads decision to keep me, This they took away. The local authority HR denied this happened and yet the HR rep who threatened the school has admitted to 3 people I know, that it happened. The head of that department has since resigned and moved on with no recourse. During the time from my dismissal to now, I have found out just how easy it is to get rid of experienced staff within schools and that most authoritys in London, have not got a clue what they are doing. I can clearly see that in 40 years of education in my borough, its not got any better, in fact its worse. Our employment law says it all, the law makes it easy and low cost to get rid of the real core workers in our Country, your paid a pittance and gone.

thanks for all the comments, still a terrific site.

mildred1978

tigeress289 wrote: »

Firstly, thanks for the Link Dunroamin, I have not got a clue how to do that.
Couple of points, the list 99 contains offences and persons who would be barred from working in a school, discrimination is discrimination. In employment law, having a criminal record is not on the list but CIPD warn that this point will be argued in the future. Their own guide lines would have alowed me to keep working.

Wow. You really don't know what you're talking about, do you?

You don't write very well so it's hard to understand your meaning. Are you implying that nobody should ever be barred from working in schools or with children? Just to be clear, not all discrimination is discrimination in terms of law - sometimes it is just common sense.

When recruiting, I am perfectly entitled to remove anybody called Smith if I want to. Or anybody who has ever been employed by McDonald's. Or anybody who lives in a particular street. Yes, I would be discriminating, that's what recruitment is, but none of those would be deemed illegal.

I'm a fully paid up, fully qualified member of the CIPD. They are a professional organisation and lobby group, but they most certainly don't make law!