gggggggggggg

pupgrum

skullboy wrote: »

Or maybe they side with whoever can afford legal representation over unrepresented claimants. I think it is awful that people like me who are in low paid jobs with a low level education are expected to represent yourself against barristers at tribunal. Surely there should be help for people in these situations. Just doesn't seem fair on any level. In my opinion it would be better if they could make the process much faster so that at least you aren't spending years dwelling on something as this makes it much harder to just forget about it and just move on. I am going to ask for a review and see what happens.

I smell a troll. You can get free legal aid, and there are plenty of solicitors and barristers offering pro bono work, and many more trainees offering to help for free because the market's flooded with trainees. Advice from trainees might not be the same as an experienced lawyer, but it's better than representing yourself with no help at all. A trainee solicitor wouldn't represent you, but can guide you in how to represent yourself to win.

skullboy

No but the three of them could very well know the respondent and side with them irrespective if they knew me or not. I guess loosing is just hard to take. Alls you can do is give it your best shot and if that's not good enough then so be it. I know they where wrong and that's all that matters.

getmore4less

what particular point of law have they got incorrect and why?

TELLIT01

skullboy wrote: »

No but the three of them could very well know the respondent and side with them irrespective if they knew me or not. I guess loosing is just hard to take. Alls you can do is give it your best shot and if that's not good enough then so be it. I know they where wrong and that's all that matters.

No. They disagreed with you which is not the same as being wrong. Even if all 3 did know the respondent, they are looking at the law rather than the individual when making their decision. If they acted otherwise everybody would go to appeal and win. How long do you think they would last in their job?

A basic search using "employment tribunal legal aid" gives masses of information about help available. The top entry when I did the search gives links to everything from CAB to Law Centres and The Bar Pro Bono sites. If the OP plans to try to appeal I strongly recommend they speak to one or other of them first.

Takeaway_Addict

skullboy wrote: »

Well lost my case at the tribunal. It took over 3 months after my case was heard for them to reach a decision. Funnily enough I recieved the decision that I had lost my case on Christmas Eve of all days. Needless to say that it ruined any hope I had of enjoying Christmas.the decision doesn't seem to fit with the 3 day hearing at all. They seemed to side with the respondent on every aspect of the case no matter what the evidence. Seems completely unreal how they have come to some of their conclusions. I can only describe it as being completely corrupted. I represented myself and feel this decision is so unjust and fills me full of rage. What a complete waste of time and worry. What a joke. How can they get away with this type of behaviour in this day and edge. All so can say it's time this government got a rude sharp awakening if this is what they expect people to go through over a wrk issue. 2 years of stress for this !!!!!

Thought you said you wanted to move on whatever the decision???

skullboy

Saying and doing are two different things! Thet were allowed to add documents to the bundle at the hearing. Documents that they had failed to disclose and which I had never seen before. I objected but no notice was taken. Though u weren't allowed to ambush people at tribunal.

Crazy_Jamie

The problem is that your perception of what is fair and the basis for various legal tests are two different standards. Your use of 'they' suggests that your case was heard by a panel, which in turn suggests that it was a discrimination case. There are nuances to discrimination law, and depending on what exactly your allegation it may be that either there were hurdles to overcome that you couldn't do on the evidence, or that the other side had some defence or what you may consider to be a technical argument to defeat your claim on the evidence. The law rarely requires an employer to act perfectly.

All you're doing at the moment is demonstrating unfocused anger, which does make sense because you have lost a claim that you had high expectations of winning. You're perfectly entitled to disagree with their decision, as you almost naturally will do, but going as far as saying that they were corrupt or could all have known the other side and sided with them is just conspiratorial nonsense. Equally, whilst I understand the frustration at them producing documents on the morning of the hearing, the Tribunal will have balanced various factors in deciding them to rely on those documents, and it's almost certainly right to say that no notice was taken of your objections. Notice will have been taken, the Tribunal just didn't side with you ultimately.

If you genuinely believe that they are grounds for a review or an appeal, then by all means take this further. But statistically that is unlikely to be the case, and certainly you haven't provided any meaningful information to suggest that that is the case. Chances are the decision was justifiable, albeit one that you disagreed with, in which case you need to give yourself time to be frustrated, but then ultimately concentrate on moving on.

Undervalued

skullboy wrote: »

Ggggggggghu

Little point in deleting your post when it has been quoted in replies!

xapprenticex

skullboy wrote: »

Well lost my case at the tribunal. It took over 3 months after my case was heard for them to reach a decision. Funnily enough I recieved the decision that I had lost my case on Christmas Eve of all days. Needless to say that it ruined any hope I had of enjoying Christmas.the decision doesn't seem to fit with the 3 day hearing at all. They seemed to side with the respondent on every aspect of the case no matter what the evidence. Seems completely unreal how they have come to some of their conclusions. I can only describe it as being completely corrupted. I represented myself and feel this decision is so unjust and fills me full of rage. What a complete waste of time and worry. What a joke. How can they get away with this type of behaviour in this day and edge. All so can say it's time this government got a rude sharp awakening if this is what they expect people to go through over a wrk issue. 2 years of stress for this !!!!!

As said, just move on.