ET3 - Can a Claimant counter lies and how (with evidence)

[Earnie82]

Hi,

I am currently dealing with a former employer in relation to an ET case. An ET3 was submitted 6 months ago but failed to deal with the substance of my claim. The EJ then granted the Respondent leave a few months ago to redo it. My question is:

** the new ET3 is a total change of story from the old

** the new ET3 is expectedly full of mistruths and blatant lies, can i counter the ET3 as i need to include evidence that disproves their claims?

Many thanks

[ULA]

If the ET have allowed the submission of new ET3 form then that is what will be used as your former employer's defence.

There is no form that you can use to counter their revised ET3, however what you will be doing as your claim proceeds through the ET process is to deal with this by way of the documents that will need to be disclosed by you and the respondent as part of the document exchange process and within your witness statement.

You are at the very beginning of what, depending on your claim could be a long process.

[Promula]

I don't agree with the above. If you can prove obvious dishonesty in the ET3 you can apply to strike it out at a preliminary hearing.

[ULA]

There is a clearly defined process to go through and a "strike out" is the most draconian action that a Tribtunal can take in relation to a claim or a defence and it is not done lightly. Assuming the ET have accepted the revised ET3 from the respondent, you will need to start preparing your case very clearly setting out what you believe are the mistruths and blatant lies in preparation for any PHR, if it is determined that there should be one.

[Serendipity8]

I agree with ULA, the best way to disprove their lies is to obtain copies of the documentation to support their version of events within the ET3. You need to submit a subject access request ASAP.

If nothing is provided from the SAR to support their version of events but then mysteriously turns up in the bundle disclosure, then you have a basis to call out their lies, plus the serious offence of withholding information from a SAR.

If they do not provide any documentation within the disclosure to support their version of events, then they have no defence and you can challenge them at the hearing on that basis