Help on taking an ex-employer to Court

[Drewdarlow]

Okay.

I would like your opinions on this...

I worked for a company for seven weeks then got sick for the next three. Then resigned, rather than milk said company for SSP. I was due £300 in Statutory Sick Pay and £100 holiday pay. They paid me neither. I chased it up for months, with them telling me it was not owed, and in the end it was Chrimbo and I told them I needed the money for my Christmas holiday, and without this £400 my time on holiday was going to suck. They refused to pay. I warned them I would hold them responsible and they still refused. Christmas came and went and it sucked, I had to work in a burger bar part time whilst on holiday to make ends meet.


I kept asking, time and again, for the money they owed, and they kept saying no, I then had a subject access report sent to me. Only they delivered it to the wrong address, failed to redact a load of information on other employees and customers properly (I even saw things such as one guy who worked for the company had an attachment of earnings attached to his pay, and also a line "I'm [MANAGING DIRECTOR'S NAME] protector on this one" in an email from the guy I was dealing with from HR). The wrong delivery address thing was continually denied by them despite there being an email sent to them stating the new address, which they acknowledged receiving. I complained to the Information Commissioner's Office. The findings of the ICO were damning. They failed to redact, they sent my report to the wrong address, and they neglected to send important stuff like my contract, which contained info about my holiday entitlement. They offered me £200 for the documents back to properly redact them in a WITHOUT PREJUDICE offer. I told them go to hell. They owed me £470 by this point (for this £200 they wanted me to drop ALL claims including the holiday pay and the SSP...)

I can basically show a Judge how much BS and lies they sent my way before the SSP team for Inland Revenue ordered them to pay me. I can show they still are breaching the contract not paying the holiday pay, and I think get a Judge to tell them to pay it. I can show the breaches of DPA, via the ICO findings letter (they denied all things about my subject access report to me, yet when it came to speak to the ICO, they admitted everything. And weren't fined).


So then I spoke to the Inland Revenue who ordered them to pay the SSP. This after they denied a half dozen times more they owed it to me, even after I told them precisely the reason why, a reason repeated when the Inland Revenue told them to pay me.


They are still refusing to pay the holiday pay owed, to this day, despite my contract stating I am owed it.

I cannot go to an employment tribunal, as it is way too late. I am taking them to Court for Breach Of Contract.


So I want to send a claim, wait for the defence, and then ask for Summary Judgement for my costs in time in all this - before litigation and then having to take them to Court, as well as the holiday pay I am owed and loss of chance costs...should run to a big amount...I don't think they have a leg to stand on and I think a Judge would agree...


I have also repeatedly tried to get them to settle this and told them I intend to start a blog in the public interest on the manager and his shady dealings because they have refused to settle. They have accused me of libel and extortion (whilst to my mind this would be truth and fair comment).

I think that I have them on breach of contract (the remedy I will ask for is Specific Performance), negligence, and Loss of Chance OR damages for distress and inconvenience, because I definitely told them I needed the money and it ruined my holiday...what say you?

And they can't state remoteness of claim for my ruined holiday because I warned them not paying me would lead to this and I would hold them responsible...

btw - the HR guy was fired shortly after - I found that out when I got a subject access report from the Information Commissioners Office to see what they said about my complaint to the ICO.

[Drewdarlow]

Re: Help on taking an ex-employer to Court

Come on people, help me out here. You're all smart.

[labman]

Re: Help on taking an ex-employer to Court

I know absolutely nothing about employment law, but taking what you've put at face value, it seems you have a pretty bullet proof case.

What exactly are you asking for our opinion on - what grounds you should state on your court claim?

[Drewdarlow]

Re: Help on taking an ex-employer to Court

I know absolutely nothing about employment law, but taking what you've put at face value, it seems you have a pretty bullet proof case.

What exactly are you asking for our opinion on - what grounds you should state on your court claim?

Yes, what's my exact case, and what costs can I claim back?

[smileyculture]

Re: Help on taking an ex-employer to Court

Have you started your Breach of Contract claim yet? If you are a self litigant, you should be able to claim around £30 an hour for your legal costs. Try to keep a record of the time you spend on preparing papers etc.. Your fee to make the application is, I think about £220. Stick to the facts of what you are claiming. The defendants can make an offer at any stage whilst the action is on going and they will argue over costs if you fail to accept, any of their offers. You need to know in your head, what you want from the off. Don't start day dreaming over big awards, as it does not happen. Be positive but realistic, good luck.

[charitynjw]

Re: Help on taking an ex-employer to Court

Have you started your Breach of Contract claim yet? If you are a self litigant, you should be able to claim around £30 an hour for your legal costs. Try to keep a record of the time you spend on preparing papers etc.. Your fee to make the application is, I think about £220. Stick to the facts of what you are claiming. The defendants can make an offer at any stage whilst the action is on going and they will argue over costs if you fail to accept, any of their offers. You need to know in your head, what you want from the off. Don't start day dreaming over big awards, as it does not happen. Be positive but realistic, good luck.

Where did you get that figure from, smiley?

Could you give us a link,maybe?

[labman]

Re: Help on taking an ex-employer to Court

This confirms what I believed to be the case, that an LiP can claim £18 per hour as per the update (and near doubling of costs claimable) in 2011:

The Civil Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2013, published on 13 February 2013, do not alter substantially the position in relation to Litigants in Person, but the relevant rule is now CPR 46.5.

New CPR 46.5(5), replacing its identically worded predecessor, pre-empts double recovery by providing:

‘A litigant who is allowed costs for attending at court to conduct his case is not entitled to a witness allowance in respect of such attendance in addition to those costs.’
Litigants in person (LIPs) fall into two categories: those who can prove financial loss and those who cannot. The new rate of £18 an hour is compensation for time reasonably spent by those who cannot prove financial loss.

And what of those who can prove loss? There are two caps: first, they cannot recover more than they have lost. The second cap is that the litigant cannot recover more than two-thirds of the amount to which a solicitor would have been entitled.

Following the Jackson reforms, the position had to be looked at again as the number of LiP's is likely to increase dramatically.

[smileyculture]

Re: Help on taking an ex-employer to Court

The figure comes from my Solicitor, who at a cost of approx. £100 and hour, informs me that I can claim on average a third of a professional. Any advice they provide and invoice me for, I can claim that, full amount back. The secret is to win first, then worry about costs after. I am amazed that the Courts allow defendants the chance to make an offer right at the last minute and then use it against you, as a threat against costs. As labman points out, there is a minimum, so I don't think my figure is a bad one.

[charitynjw]

Re: Help on taking an ex-employer to Court

The figure comes from my Solicitor, who at a cost of approx. £100 and hour, informs me that I can claim on average a third of a professional. Any advice they provide and invoice me for, I can claim that, full amount back. The secret is to win first, then worry about costs after. I am amazed that the Courts allow defendants the chance to make an offer right at the last minute and then use it against you, as a threat against costs. As labman points out, there is a minimum, so I don't think my figure is a bad one.

The Overriding Objective actively promotes mediation & settlement.

See http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...ttlement-storm for future developments.

[Drewdarlow]

Re: Help on taking an ex-employer to Court

Good stuff everyone...


Regarding payment for distress and inconvenience, I found the following...wondering if anyone has any comment on whether I can claim that as I advised I needed the payment due me as per our contract for my holiday - i.e. for a pleasurable stay, and only suffered the opposite i.e. distress and inconvenience as a result, I can claim for such?


"Claiming Compensation for Distress & Inconvenience


Mon, 11/07/2011 - 11:32 — Pro Neg
Professional negligence solicitor, Emma Slade assess the entitlement to claim damages for mental distress, anxiety and inconvenience in Professional Negligence and Breach of Contract Cases
If there has been damage caused by breach of contract or professional negligence then the innocent party is likely to find dealing with the results of that breach or negligence extremely stressful and worrying. Throw in the trials and tribulations of litigation and the justice system and it is no wonder that more and more people are asking whether, alongside their claim for damages for loss, they can also make a claim for distress and inconvenience. There are exceptions but surprisingly the answer to that is generally, “no”.
Bingham LJ gave the deciding decision in the 1993 case of Watts –v- Morrow by saying:
"A contract-breaker is not in general liable for any distress, frustration, anxiety, displeasure, vexation, tension or aggravation which his breach of contract may cause to the innocent party. This rule is not, I think, founded on the assumption that such reactions are not foreseeable, which they surely are or may be, but on considerations of policy.”
In short, it is a policy decision by the Courts not to routinely award compensation for anxiety, inconvenience and distress: if they allowed a claim for stress in simple cases, the fear it would open the proverbial floodgates to even more litigation.
However, there are exceptions to the rule and His Lordship identified the first one in the paragraph immediately after:
“But the rule is not absolute. Where the very object of a contract is to provide pleasure, relaxation, peace of mind or freedom from molestation, damages will be awarded if the fruit of the contract is not provided or if the contrary result is procured instead.”
He made it clear that damages for inconvenience and anxiety would only arise in very exceptional cases. One such case concerns a surveyor’s professional negligence claim, Farley –v- Skinner 2001, where the Court was prepared to agree that Mr Farley’s situation fell into this category. Mr Farley was about to purchase a large property which was located near Heathrow Airport. Part of his instructions to his surveyor was to ascertain whether the property was in the airport’s flight path, as he was concerned about noise. The surveyor assured him that it was not and the purchase went ahead only for Mr Farley to discover that his new home was indeed in a flight path. Mr Farley was extremely distressed by this, advising the Court he was unable to enjoy his property as a result. The Court concluded that mere disappointment (due to breach of contract) is insufficient for compensation to be awarded but in this case, Mr Farley’s express condition to the surveyor was such that one of the very points of the survey was to provide Mr Farley with peace of mind. He was therefore granted compensation for his distress..
A similar situation arose in the Watts –v- Morrow case: a surveyor told his client that the house the Claimants were buying was in good condition but in fact, substantial works needed to be carried out. This put considerable strain on their marriage due to the appalling conditions they had to live under. The Court agreed they should receive an award for their physical discomfort and hardship. They were granted £4,000 each, though on appeal it was reduced to £750.
There is a second category where claims for distress for physical inconvenience and discomfort can arise. In this instance, like the above, there does need to be a contract between the parties – the Courts will not grant damages if the Claimant is suing purely in negligence. A classic example is the 1996 case of Ruxley Electronics & Construction Ltd –v- Forsyth. The Claimant had been instructed to build a swimming pool for Mr Forsyth who was quite a tall gentleman. The specification for the pool was very specific but the Claimant built it 18” too shallow. Mr Forsyth claimed damages for the cost of remedying the defect as well as making a claim for distress.
In this instance, the House of Lords stated that the cost of cure was vastly disproportionate as it would mean the entire pool would have to be rebuilt. Mr Forsyth argued that as a result of the defect though, he was not able to enjoy the pool. The Court agreed and gave him damages for loss of amenity.
There is then a third category. This one is slightly more difficult to succeed upon and this is where the claim is brought in tort rather than contract. In those circumstances where there is not such an immediate relationship, the Court has ordered that firstly, any injury must be an actual psychiatric injury (rather than mere distress and inconvenience) and secondly, the likelihood of such injury should be foreseeable to the Defendant.
Despite these three categories, the issue of mental distress and inconvenience is constantly being considered by the Courts as more and more Claimants bring claims under these headings. But whilst there are more claims, from a practical stance, it would appear that the Courts are limiting what claims they are allowing through.
If you think that you might have a breach of contract or professional negligence claim, then please do not hesitate to contact solicitor, Emma Slade on 01392 423000 who would be happy to provide you with a FREE initial assessment of your case."

[charitynjw]

Re: Help on taking an ex-employer to Court

Hi Drewdarlow,

Errr...........have you actually read the passage you are hoping to rely on?

[smileyculture]

Re: Help on taking an ex-employer to Court

Drew as charity has pointed out, I don't think you read it right. But lets start again. You have a straight forward case you can win, tunnel vision is what you need, not spaghetti junction. Sit down, fill the application in and start the action. You are out of time on the ET but if you have not already started the CC route, the defendants could argue you should have gone the ET route and try to get in stopped in its tracks, as you have used the wrong jurisdiction. Enough said.

[charitynjw]

Re: Help on taking an ex-employer to Court

To action a claim involving unlawfully withholding money (wrongful dismissal), the OP would have a choice of ET or County Court.

It is well within the County Court time limit.

[Drewdarlow]

Re: Help on taking an ex-employer to Court

Anyone have advice on claiming some sort of money back for the ruined hols then?

[charitynjw]

Re: Help on taking an ex-employer to Court

Was there an actual, quantifiable loss? (Not a speculative 'if I'd have been given the money, I would have used it for a holiday')