Is this COT3 valid?

Ozzuk

Just a word of warning, your story has many holes and it is clear you are only looking for answers that support your position.  That is a very risky position to be undetaking legal action.  You are of course free to sue anyone, whether you win or not is a different case and losing carries the risk of being hit with costs - the risk increases if your claim is seen as spurious (for example by attempting to ignore a COT3).
But I'm not a lawyer, and the clear advice is get one.  You are arguing a lot against the clear advice - if you try that in court a judge won't appreciate it, no matter how much you believe you are right.
A lawyer might see a case (or might not), in which case you'll have support to proceed (if you can affort the cost in monetary and stress terms).

steampowered

bobthelog said:

Hi, thank you for your reply, however,

1. ACAS did NOT send "an email over a 3 day period". They phoned me at least twice a day,  sometimes more, they emailed me once a day, ex employer emailed me once a day. 5 days later I signed it to stop them ringing me consistently, as emails I could cope with I can just ignore, they aren't in your face like your phone ringing AGAIN and you know why they are ringing you - to sign this really complicated COT3 document that you don't understand. Is that not the legal definition of harassment?

2. "Your therapist is not a lawyer." I am confused as the previous posters said that I need medical people to say I lack capacity. I would, politely, argue against you here as lawyers know far less than a pyschologist and are no experts in mental health and ability?

Many thanks.

That sounds like a completely normal number of phone calls. If you answered (even if just to say "I need more time"), they wouldn't have needed to keep calling you. I don't think you have a leg to stand on claiming harassment I'm afraid.

Incapacity has a specific legal definition which is generally restricted to people who are completely unable to manage their own affairs - general stress or depression doesn't meet the legal threshold. Have a read of sites like https://www.mentalhealth.org.uk/a-to-z/m/mental-capacity. 

Out of interest, why are you spending so much time on this COT3 issue? Are you planning to sue your employer again - if so, why?

bobthelog

Ozzuk said:

Just a word of warning, your story has many holes and it is clear you are only looking for answers that support your position.  That is a very risky position to be undetaking legal action.  You are of course free to sue anyone, whether you win or not is a different case and losing carries the risk of being hit with costs - the risk increases if your claim is seen as spurious (for example by attempting to ignore a COT3).
But I'm not a lawyer, and the clear advice is get one.  You are arguing a lot against the clear advice - if you try that in court a judge won't appreciate it, no matter how much you believe you are right.
A lawyer might see a case (or might not), in which case you'll have support to proceed (if you can affort the cost in monetary and stress terms).

Hi: "A lawyer might see a case (or might not), in which case you'll have support to proceed (if you can affort the cost in monetary and stress terms). "

So does this mean without a lawyer the judge will not take heed of any of my arguments? So, can I not litigate in person - assuming employee is armed to the full with legals because the judge won't take any notice of me, despite what I say?

Ozzuk

bobthelog said:

Ozzuk said:

Just a word of warning, your story has many holes and it is clear you are only looking for answers that support your position.  That is a very risky position to be undetaking legal action.  You are of course free to sue anyone, whether you win or not is a different case and losing carries the risk of being hit with costs - the risk increases if your claim is seen as spurious (for example by attempting to ignore a COT3).
But I'm not a lawyer, and the clear advice is get one.  You are arguing a lot against the clear advice - if you try that in court a judge won't appreciate it, no matter how much you believe you are right.
A lawyer might see a case (or might not), in which case you'll have support to proceed (if you can affort the cost in monetary and stress terms).

Hi: "A lawyer might see a case (or might not), in which case you'll have support to proceed (if you can affort the cost in monetary and stress terms). "

So does this mean without a lawyer the judge will not take heed of any of my arguments? So, can I not litigate in person - assuming employee is armed to the full with legals because the judge won't take any notice of me, despite what I say?

You could of course do it yourself, I just said you'd have support.  A lawyer will know how to frame your arguements (and advise which ones are not valid).  For example if you try and argue with the judge about your therapist's status.  A lawyer won't be emotionally involved, which colours a lot of arguements and it can be difficult to accept what you think might be wrong.

k3lvc

@bobthelog I'll repeat what others have said in terms of getting proper legal advice and stopping your search for loopholes etc. I was in a similar situation a few years ago - 9 months off work with clearly documented work-related stress. Up to month 6 I decided the world was against me and it was all the companies fault and I started picking holes in every action they made building myself up to go for a constructive dismissal case. I asked around for legal advice and took my 30mins with one of the most respected in the area. The 30mins changed my life - he spoke bluntly about my chances of success, explained the process and the validity of all my employer had done, and suggested a different therapist. It took me a further 6 months of a phased return to full time working in the same company/same role (albeit with a different boss) and I'm still here and progressing.

Not all companies/situations are the same but when, as you've said, the mind is foggy then rational judgement goes out of the window and it often needs a 3rd party to help you re-focus. Given you're not listening to the vast experience here please go and seek that alternative judgement before you spiral even further into the depressive black hole

nora_nora

I think OP should just go ahead with this. He clearly doesn't need the good advice already given & has a very strong case here. Do come back and let us know how it went. Good luck.

Manxman_in_exile

bobthelog said:

Ozzuk said:

Just a word of warning, your story has many holes and it is clear you are only looking for answers that support your position.  That is a very risky position to be undetaking legal action.  You are of course free to sue anyone, whether you win or not is a different case and losing carries the risk of being hit with costs - the risk increases if your claim is seen as spurious (for example by attempting to ignore a COT3).
But I'm not a lawyer, and the clear advice is get one.  You are arguing a lot against the clear advice - if you try that in court a judge won't appreciate it, no matter how much you believe you are right.
A lawyer might see a case (or might not), in which case you'll have support to proceed (if you can affort the cost in monetary and stress terms).

Hi: "A lawyer might see a case (or might not), in which case you'll have support to proceed (if you can affort the cost in monetary and stress terms). "

So does this mean without a lawyer the judge will not take heed of any of my arguments? So, can I not litigate in person - assuming employee is armed to the full with legals because the judge won't take any notice of me, despite what I say?

I think what Ozzuk is saying is that you need someone from outside to look at all the circumstances surrounding your situation and give you disinterested advice.  At the foot of page two of this thread you posted something along the lines of "... so in all liklihood this COT3 may be invalid?".  A comment which, in all honesty, shows that you have a very blinkered view and/or you have completely failed to understand what others have posted - which is that in all liklihood it is valid.

There's nothing to prevent you litigating in person, and the tribunal will not put obstacles in your way because you are a LIP, but neither will they accept an argument from you that has no legal basis just because you aren't legally represented.  That's why you should seek professional legal advice to determine in the first place if you have any valid basis for a claim at all.  You will have to present a legal argument supporting your claim that you lacked capacity to sign the agreement - just saying "That's what my therapist said" is unlikely to be sufficient.

There's an old saying in the legal profession that "a lawyer who acts for himself has a fool for a client".  That saying does not exist for no reason.

bobthelog

Update: it was judged as an invalid contract due to my lack of capacity to contract at that time. I didn’t have a lawyer I just told the truth and I guess the truth is the main winning factor.

Thanks for all of your support though :-/

Takeaway_Addict

bobthelog said:

Update: it was judged as an invalid contract due to my lack of capacity to contract at that time. I didn’t have a lawyer I just told the truth and I guess the truth is the main winning factor.

Thanks for all of your support though :-/

By who?

steampowered

bobthelog said:

Update: it was judged as an invalid contract due to my lack of capacity to contract at that time. I didn’t have a lawyer I just told the truth and I guess the truth is the main winning factor.

What are you going to do now? Start a fresh set of legal proceedings against your employer?