Unfair Dismissal - DIY Employment Tribunal

g0liath

sniggings wrote: »

the solicitor not taking the case means nothing, the OP was unable or unwilling to pay the fees asked, it's as simple as that.

these types of cases are not "no win no fee" tpye cases, as the award if the employee were to win, would in most cases be less than the fees asked by the solicitor.

So you are a Solicitor. That explains a lot-:mad:

g0liath

g0liath wrote: »

So you are a Solicitor. That explains a lot-:mad:

Frutildeli not Snigging :j

g0liath

fruitedeli wrote: »

If you really made a racist remark, interpreted as racist by any reasonable man, I hope your ex-employer, as matter of principle and to set an example, takes this all the way so you don't get a single penny. There are racist people in this world who think employers are afraid of defending themselves and will just settle and give them a payout. Won't happen if you have no leg to stand on, as implied by you having to let go of your solicitor.

So you are a Solicitor with a chip on your feeble shoulder?

g0liath

The_Hurricane wrote: »

I'm still unsure as to what was supposed to have been racist.

That's the magic Hurricane, there wasn't any racism! The person used the race card for what ever reason and it didn't work out for them. I was the one with the ton of grief and no job, no career, no money. You get the picture...

mum2one

sometimes its better to bite the bullet and take an offer - from my experience, I sued my ex employer for unfair constructive dismissal, although I had a solicitor it was under the old legal aid, where they could so some work and I had to face the tribuals.

The stunts my ex-companies solicitors pulled was unbelievable, like yourself, - but once or twice they had a flee in their ear by the tribunal board.

What happened with me, we spent 2 years going back and forth to tribunals kept getting adjourned, and then I lost the tribunal.

lucky (the gods must have been shining on me (I'm not religious)), the tribunal had mad a massive error and didn't follow procedure.

From there we had to get a barrister involved to read the report (back in 2005 this was 1k) barrister says yes you have a case to have the verdict chucked aside but we need to appeal in ET in London - ok - I didn't have to go - 1st hearing Barrister went to see if we could put an appeal in (5k) then back again couple weeks later for a hearing (5k) - she walked in ready to go blah blah, blah - tribunal came straight out with error - verdict cancelled - go back to tribunal.

The hearing was relisted for the end of Jan, a week before we had a cash offer (completely out of the blue - all instigated from their side) we turned down the 1st offer - then within 1 hr a new offer nearly 60% extra - I was advised to take it.

As part of the offer I had to sign a confidentually agreement re the sum offered and the terms of the settlement were no liability admitted.

If I had of gone to a tribunal and be awarded less - the tribunal would have been informed of the offers - and I would be responsible for the other sides costs. Although mine was on legal aid, my legal aid bill was 47k (not joking).

Whilst my case was going on a fellow manager was also going throu tribunal, but they sacked her, although she won her case it was agreed that she was 50% responsible and her compo was reduced to 2k.

For me if I had been looking for work whilst going through the tribunal (I didn't as the result of me leaving was what happened while I was pregnant), my loss of earnings and tax credits etc I would have been looking at 60k, then if my 1st solicitor had done his job properly (as I had 2 claims in - lost the 1st due to the incompetence of solicitor - had I have won that I would have been sitting very very pretty).

What I'm trying to say is there is no lose of face if you take an out of court offer - it worked for me, for me it was the equivalent of 8 mths take home pay, thou rumours were circulating that I had 80k, so I smiled sweetly xx

g0liath

What I'm trying to say is there is no lose of face if you take an out of court offer - it worked for me, for me it was the equivalent of 8 mths take home pay, thou rumours were circulating that I had 80k, so I smiled sweetly xx[/QUOTE]

Wow that was a war! Thanks for that advice!:beer:

g0liath

At the dismissal, I told the panel that this was not the last of this process. At the upheld Appeal I stated that courts do not make morel judgments but newspapers do. That is my aim when I am shown to be right.

The_Hurricane

What was the outcome of this case?

g0liath

The_Hurricane wrote: »

What was the outcome of this case?

The case is just over 2 weeks away. I have shown self deprecating Facebook comments using the alleged (but never happened) racist remarks about themselves. It shows the accuser in a different light and I have also pulled apart the process and policies.
The interviewees put words into the interviewers mouths and lead them with loaded questions. It shows they were looking for evidence to try to support anything and ignoring anything that favoured me.
I want to go all the way so it is public and I will be vindicated and compensated. We will wait and see....

FBaby

I'm confused at the evidence used for the dismissal and what it is you are challenging. Clearly there is an element of judgement here. You say you are not racist and your comments were not racist. Fair enough but could it be argued this was your perspective and how it was perforce could be very different and still genuine? How did they come to the conclusion that it was against their policy? Which part of the policy did they cite specifically? Ate toy challenging the dismissal on the basis of them not following the procedure for dismissal or wrong interpretation of the policy?