In response to a reader, who has asked “what are you trying to achieve?” I want clarify. The purpose of this blog is to highlight and expose the injustice of our Employment Tribunals and the dishonesty and corruption of some of its judges.
As a result of this fraudulent claim by an employee who is a petty criminal, I have spent nearly £30000 in legal fees and his award and costs added up to £36000.I have had to cease trading as a partnership and and set up a limited company to protect my livelihood, we have had bailiffs try to remove all our assets from our business and they have come to our home twice.My wife has been traumatised by this. Is this justice?
I have had to place my affairs in the hands of an insolvency practitioner (another £4000) to protect me from creditors, the most aggressive being this ex-employee. I have had to place my only family home on the market, to pay these debts. I am 62 and am too old to get another mortgage. Is this justice?
The stress it has placed on our family, is such that we barely talk to each other any more. Is this justice?
My business has been hanging on by a thread for the last 3 years, and I cannot see how we can survive beyond next February . I had to max out my overdraft to pacify the bailliffs. When, as seems likely, the company goes down, there will be no money to pay redundancies to our 6 employees, but the claimant is entitled to the proceeds of my house. Is this justice?
The employee was a petty criminal of low intelligence, who has been awarded a sum of over thirty thousand pounds, on the basis of a case which is made up of lies and distortions. He also went to the police andtold them a load of lies about being assaulted and about the condition of the vehicle. More about that later.He claimed in court that he had sent a letter of grievance. Under questioning it transpired that he had lied about this, but that didnt harm his case, because, in law, he is not required to make any attempt to resolve the issue. He may proceed direct to the Employment Tribunal. The onus is entirely on the employer. The fact that he had provided an incorrect name and address to the tribunal, presented no problem for the judge. In Judge Tickle’s judgement, since the documents had been posted, it meant that in law, they were deemed to have been received . As a result of this, I had no idea, that the claimant considered himself dismissed until I received a court judgent against me many months later. Since I had written to him telling him he should return to work and received no reply, I had assumed that he had left voluntarily. Again, in law it appears there is no onus on him to try to resolve the situation. It is entirely the responsibility of the employer. The fact that I had written to him instructing him to return to work, was, in the judges view, not enough, even though it was clear to the employee that he understood that his job was still open to him
He tried to claim that I had attacked and bruised him.Imade it clear that I had used minimal force to remove him as he had repeatedly refused to leave. I pointed out that he had a history of aggressive behaviour in the worshop . He lied about this, but under questioning he admitted that on at least one occasion he had attacked a fellow worker with a piece of wood. This didnt bother the judge, she held me entirely responsible for the situation getting out of hand and believed his lies about being “bruised”, above my version, even though I had told the truth throughout. I was surprised by his suggestion that he had been roughed up by me so I obtained the police report. which states ”Please close this as no unlawful assault has taken place – reasonable force to eject a person from the premises.
More upseeting than all of this has been the way the judges have lied, distorted and perverted the evidence to save face.To read more about this, see my blog “Judges Protect their Own”