"Without prejudice" as email signature? What does this mean?

[Harridan1981]

Someone I come into contact with through work signs off with this. Think service user.

For example:
Hello,

John will be late for his appointment.

Without prejudice,
Jill.

I've heard it referenced in a legal setting, but as a regular sign off to an every day email? What does this mean?

That’s a bit odd. Like you I’ve only seen it in a legal sense in emails.

I would assume it means they don't know what without prejudice means . It's a term used in legal correspondence to mean 'this isn't to be used as evidence in court', usually when you are negotiating an out of court settlement or similar. But even in that context you can't just declare everything you send to be 'without prejudice' on a blanket basis - I am guessing the person is maybe a bit paranoid and thinks they're somehow protecting themselves against being sued though?

It means that the person is an arsehole who thinks they look clever and actually looks an idiot. It's specific legal terminology.

I was getting kind of Freeman of the land vibes, but can't think what

@Harridan1981

I was getting kind of Freeman of the land vibes, but can't think what

Lol. Probably means real ale only + sea shanties.

It's possible they have multiple signatures and have used the wrong one.

Without Prejudice is for communications the sender wants kept out of court. It's supposed to make negotiations easier.

Someone I come across who does do legal negotiations uses it for every email. I'd assume it's a coverall in her auto signature to make sure it's always there when it's needed.

That's what my twat of an ex put at the end of every email while we were divorcing. He wrote all kinds of wankery, but Jill does not appear to be playing weird kind games and gaslighting you, so am unsure why it's used in these instances...

It means they do not take legal advice and are using the wrong phrase.

If you are offering to settle a dispute and making concessions then lawyers will mark correspondence without prejudice and if they are not trying to settle and pushing their points home the letter will not be marked as that and will be what is known as "open".

The other weird one in business is E&OE which means errors and omissions excepted ie I might have cocked up the whole document (which always seems a pointless thing to put on an invoice or order)

Clutching at straws or being charitable, I suppose if someone includes 'without prejudice' and 'subject to contract' then they might then think they don't need to proactively judge the content of an email and remembering to add the relevant provision. Wasn't certain whether it being in a footer that could be lost in a chain would carry any weight if it were sought to be relied on or whether if it were required - am reminded that it might ideally need to be in the header so the other party has scope to agree before reading on - I've seen -

"There are no rules about this but generally, at the top of any document or in the subject line etc - so that it is instantly clear to the reader.

In any discussions or meetings, where relevant, it is best to mention this right at the outset and to seek confirmation from the other party that they agree to the communication being without prejudice."

Most corporate email footers I read don't contain the appropriate provision and legal corporate requirements and do contain errors.

Cringe

Why on earth are they doing this?! Agreed with others (having worked with solicitors) they obviously have no idea or little idea what it means or the context in which to use it, but thinks it makes them look clever.

Surely, without prejudice, all that's left is pride ?

I'd say it'd someone with an inflated ego thinking it makes them sound important

@DGRossetti

Surely, without prejudice, all that's left is pride ?

@Wishingthreestonesaway

It means that the person is an arsehole who thinks they look clever and actually looks an idiot. It's specific legal terminology.

Yep. Sounds right. Bet they've got pronouns as well.

What kind of service user... Honestly it sounds to me as though they either don't understand what the phrase means or have difficulty understanding social norms... In the context of being a service user I assumed learning disabilities or a mental health or social communication disorder...

That’s hilarious! My guess is they saw a lawyer use it and thought it sounded cool but they don’t realise it means ‘you can’t use this in Court’ 🤣

In some circles it is assumed to mean 'you can't use this against me'. These circles may also quote the Magna Carta as good law, and use the phrase 'I do not consent' liberally.

My sister used to sign off like this during her online hate campaign against me. They think using legal terms like this affords them gravity where none actually exists.

My favourite was the one mentioning how she’s taking her sister (me) and her boyfriend’s ex to court to sue us, ‘without prejudice’ her social media post stated, forgetting that she wasn’t actually sat in the court waiting room that morning posting about it, because the court is always shut that day .

@LizDoingTheCanCan I'd not made the association with a freeman.

Yes, FotL is what I was wondering. She is an anti Vax, anti mask, covid denier, anti all sorts so may not surprise me.

Not mental.health related service at all.

You're right to suspect her of being a Free Man. She probably goes on about Legal Tender and serves notices on innocent staff asking her to wear a mask in the supermarket.

I commission work from people. They invoice the accounts department who always send me a copy to confirm. Somebody didn't know I'd be able to see invoices and always sent an invoice to accounts for more money with E&OE on the bottom. It stands for Errors and Omissions Excepted.

I called her and asked why she was doing it and she said the wrong amounts were a mistake because she was really busy and the disclaimer was just a polite way to alert us to the possibility of her making mistakes.

She obviously thought it was some kind of legal Get Out Of Jail Free card. I asked her nicely to stop doing it. She didn't so I stopped commissioning her. I didn't really care that she was trying to diddle the company but suspicion was falling on me. Her work wasn't that good anyway.

It's great when you ask someone a question and they say: "No comment" because they've heard it on the telly and think it means you are magically banned from writing the story. All it means is that you go ahead and put: "So-and-so was asked for a comment but did not wish to make one."

@limitedperiodonly have seen similar but it's interesting when mistakes that statistically might be expected to sometimes be to either parties' benefit only favoured one side.