Preliminary Tribunal Hearing.

gomer

Margarine. Two loafs of bread & some fish fingers...

BoGoF

Without further details of your case we don't know if it's a scare tactic or not.

gomer

BoGoF wrote: »

Without further details of your case we don't know if it's a scare tactic or not.

Please ask what details you need. I've never been to tribunal. What further details do you need?

Crazy_Jamie

If you've never been to the Tribunal before, this preliminary hearing will be to determine the issues in the case and make directions. Nothing will be decided and nobody will win or lose. As such this won't be a scare tactic in the sense of ambushing you on Monday with something that single handedly defeats your case. You will at the very least have chance to reflect on that argument and decide whether or not to pursue your case based on it.

Jurisdictional arguments in discriminations cases are almost always arguments about time limits. You have to present your claim (or, in recent years, start ACAS Early Conciliation) within 3 months of each act of discrimination. If you haven't done that, your claim will be out of time and the Tribunal will not have jurisdiction to hear it unless you persuade the Tribunal to extend time on the basis that it is just and equitable to do so. It's a very common issue in discrimination claims, and one that sometimes will be determined by a second Preliminary Hearing before directions are laid down for the trial.

In any event, making an offer at 4:45pm and withdrawing it at 5pm on the same day is just pointless. It's not only entirely unreasonable, but gives you no time to reflect on the offer even if you had seen it, so it doesn't even give you chance to be pressured into accepting it. I don't really know what they expected to achieve with that. Sounds to me like someone who is extremely inexperienced when it comes to litigation.

ACAS say from experience when an employer says it believes the court has no jurisdiction to hear a case, it usually means they are going to ask to strike it out & persue the complainant for costs.

ACAS are talking nonsense. Respondents very often rely on jurisdictional issues in discrimination claims, but but if the time limit issue is significant enough the case will proceed to a Preliminary Hearing to determine that one issue. If the Respondent wins that point, they will often win the case in its entirety, or at least the scope of the case will be narrowed. So you don't need to make an application to strike out if there's a good time limit point, because a hearing will be listed to deal with that issue without the need to make an application to strike out. The person you spoke to doesn't know what they're talking about.

In terms of costs, there is always a risk of costs, but it is generally low. The Employment Tribunal is a non costs bearing environment, which means that by default each party is responsible for their own costs, and the loser does not pay the winner's costs. The main exception to that rule is if a party has acted unreasonable in bringing or defending the claim, but unreasonable conduct in this context is a very high bar. It is possible to reach that bar if you bring and continue with a claim that is entirely without merit, but few cases are entirely without merit. Just running a case and losing it will not normally result in a costs award. If you are in danger of that, I would very much expect the other side to make that extremely clear to you and to explain their reasoning why. Even then, a lot of Respondents threaten costs when they realistically have on chance of recovering them. Of course whether you may be at risk of costs in this case depends on how the specifics and merits of your case, but as I say, costs awards are still rare in the Employment Tribunal.

BrassicWoman

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/420019-preliminary-hearing-advice-please/

gomer

Thank you for the replies on this *and the stalking*. I have received helpful advice on both threads.

robatwork

gomer wrote: »

It looks like they are trying to apply pressure last minute as the offer was made at 4.45pm & expired at 5pm, meaning i didn't even get chance to respond to them anyway.

Same tactics that scammers and fraudsters use to get people to transfer money to them.

It's underhand and frankly laughable. I'd have told them where to stick it on principle.

Of course this is nothing to do with your case which may be watertight or likely to sink without trace.

Let us know how it goes.

gomer

They called again this time with a 15min deadline.

They accept the conditions were unacceptable but argue if it was so bad i should have walked out & gone for constructive dismissal.

They say they are sending a barrister to the preliminary on monday to strike the case out & peruse me for costs on the grounds that because i remained at the site it means i 'agreed' to work there and have no case.

It was zero hours. If i didn't work my rent didn't get paid. I couldn't just walk out just like that.

BoGoF

Do ACAS think you have a case?

Who is representing you?

Undervalued

gomer wrote: »

They called again this time with a 15min deadline.

They accept the conditions were unacceptable but argue if it was so bad i should have walked out & gone for constructive dismissal.

They say they are sending a barrister to the preliminary on monday to strike the case out & peruse me for costs on the grounds that because i remained at the site it means i 'agreed' to work there and have no case.

It was zero hours. If i didn't work my rent didn't get paid. I couldn't just walk out just like that.

Have you taken proper legal advice on this? (No, I don't mean the ACAS helpline!!).

Comms69

What is the discrimination?


The situation isn't great for you as you can only claim loss of wages assuming you were seeking other employment, and can prove this.