Offence (sexual) committed against me at UK well known holiday park...what can I do?

[Acacia123]

Whilst staying at a UK well known 'family' holiday park in August I had an offence committed against me by a male member of staff (a minor sexual offence). This was taken seriously by the police but I have heard today that the CPS have decided not enough evidence to prosecute. Disappointing but not unexpected.

The offence itself was distressing enough but the actions of the park / site / management were so awful that I am still to this day enraged. It resulted in us cutting our holiday short and departing very hastily - children extremely distressed and me shaken - mainly due to the ineffectual 'emergency security' and hopeless management. We had decided that we would plough on with our holiday and not let one horrible man spoil everything for us but in the end we simply could not stay as they left him working 50m from our accommodation watching us (in the toilet/shower block that we had no choice but to use). Horrific.

I wrote to the management asking for an explanation of their actions (a v long 4 page letter detailing each and every point that upset me - there were numerous things) but the only response I had was to say that they could not respond as it was a police matter.

It is now no longer a police matter and I want to do something. I am sick to my stomach and enranged. I want an apology and explanation from this company. I also want to name and shame. People need to know - this is heavily advertised as a family holiday destination. They failed us so badly in their duty of care. All they were interested in was to get us off site as quickly as possible so we could not make any noise about it. In hindsight I wish that I had gone banging on accomodation doors telling the other guests what had happened but at that stage I really believed they would deal with it appropriately, professionally, responsibly...how little did I know.

Can I get into trouble by going on the internet and naming?

Is there any other course of action I could take?

But the op does have evidence?????

Not evidence that someone spied on her in the showers (but that isn't what this thread is about)

But evidence that her complaint was not adequately dealt with (which IS. What this thread is about)

I have details of a news agency that took on my late father's story - different matter - but could pm you the details.

They were able to ensure it received national news coverage. Just the mention of a news agency getting a whiff of it may be enough to make the company see sense, even more so if the news agency start investigating?

No, BettySuarez, I am not connected with any holiday company. However, unlike you and some other posters, I do know the law regarding libel.

Whilst this thread may be primarily about the OP's complaint not being dealt with properly, the fact is that she has alleged that a member of staff at a holiday park spied on her while she was in the showers. That would be the basis for any libel claim, whether by the company or the staff, so that is what the OP would have to prove. The fact that she has evidence that her complaint was not dealt with adequately would be completely irrelevant.

You certainly seem very keen to scare the OP off.

Prh7 is often on here kindly offering people advice free of charge. He is merely pointing out op could potentially open an unpleasant can of worms if she doesn't carefully consider her course of action

Thank you Santa5l1ttleHelper.

I did, up thread, suggest that the company may be trying to put the OP off from taking legal action against them. That is something she may wish to consider. If she did sue them for compensation it might result in the details of this incident entering the public domain without any risk of the OP or anyone else being sued for libel. Reports of court proceedings are protected by privilege provided they are accurate and therefore cannot result in a successful libel case.

Hmm, that may well be true of ph7 but it's a bit dodgy relying on legal advice from an anonymous poster, however well intentioned - remember judgeflounce?

Who was judgeflounce?

Can, I just ask? The legal dept of the Holiday company states in their letter that the member of staff has been exonerated. In this context does exonerate mean that the person has been cleared of all blame or does it mean that they have simply been "let off"...

If it's the former then is the holiday co suggesting that Acacia made the whole thing up?

Acacia, I admire you for fighting this - I too would be enraged by the arrogant way in which the hol co has treated you. Suspect that the "Legal Department" letter is designed to make you just go away quietly. Take it gently while you decide what to do.

ANOTHER UPDATE

I received yesterday a letter from the CPS explaining why they have decided not to prosecute. First line of the letter they tell me his name. I wasn't expecting that. Surely they shouldn't have told me his name? Does that mean that he has been told my name?

Basically, they say that it is his word against mine and chances of success are minimal. I understand that.

However they also say that there are inconsistencies in the statements which mean it will be difficult to prove exactly who said what and where etc. Now, I gave my statements very soon afterwards and it was all crystal clear in my mind. I am 100% confident in absolutely every aspect of what I said. So: this tells me that what he is saying contradicts me....so he has basically lied and talked his way out of it.

A couple of points: I've seen a few suggestions on this thread naming possible parks. I'm sure it is okay for me to confirm that none of the parks mentioned are the one.

I also now recall that at some stage I was told by the police that there was a fair chance that he would at least be cautioned. I'm going to phone them tomorrow and find out if this was ever done. I would be so delighted if it was, because then I could respond to the park and ask how they could 'completely exonerate' someone who had been cautioned. However, I think probably there was no caution.

I don't know how I can take this further. I have no evidence, despite the fact that I KNOW what happened.

I very much appreciate all of your posts. Thank you.

If I wanted, for example, to leave some posts on review sites...tripadvisor, UKCamping etc is there any safe way I could do it?

For example, could I say something like:

"I alleged that a member of staff committed a criminal (can I say sexual?) offence against me but management refused to assist me. The company has confirmed that no disciplinary action was taken against employee"

Would that be okay? It is simply stating the facts...

What do you think? Can you suggest anything better?

He will not have been cautioned, as for that he would have had to accept the caution. If he did that there would have been no action by the CPS.

I expect that if the CPS say there were inconsistencies that they possibly dont just mean between your statement and his (because that would be expected).

I woud not leave such reviews as there is no way for you to prove that the event took place. Unless they have had many such accusations they would know exactly who left the review.

Would it be worth trying to get 30 mins free time with a solicitor just to talk through possible options. You may not want (nor might it be advisable) to take a civil case through the courts, but a good solicitor might be able to draft a good letter which might put the frighteners on management to actually investigate further and respond more appropriately.

At the very very least, the staff member should be on a warning and a very close eye kept on them (and preferably moved to less vulnerable areas on site)

You can leave a review saying you are unhappy with how management dealt with a complaint but without specifying the nature of the complaint. That would be fair comment. But as soon as you mention a criminal offence it could be libellous. If the site checks reviews before posting them they would not post your comment anyway as it could leave them vulnerable to a libel suit.

I agree with RubberDuck that talking through your options with a solicitor would be a good move.

Santa5l1ttleHelper- Judgeflounce appears to have been before my time and all his/her posts have been deleted, but I presume from Edam's comment that this was one of the posters who crop up from time to time and post legal "advice" that is misleading to the point of being dangerous.

I think your idea Acacia of saying which Holiday Parks it isn't might put a lot of minds at rest - if only on MN. So if anyone wants to ask you if it is a specific park.........

If the actual park is mentioned, probably best to not comment?

was it a Haven>

was it a centre parc

was it a park home

was it a pontins

was it a butlins

Forest Holidays?

Identifying the park in any way would potentially allow them to take action. I would like to know who it is as much as anyone else. But if the OP rules out a load of parks and refuses to comment on one that would amount to identifying them.

Sadly because to prosecute the CPS need a good chance of a successful prosecution 'beyond a reasonable doubt' they have opted out. Unless the person accepted his guilt, cautioning him is not an option. You have to face it, it boils down to one persons word against another.

I would write again to the company saying how disappointed you are with their decision and hope they will either quietly get rid of him by not renewing his contract (they wont tell you if they do this as it admits they believe you over him, which leaves them legally open). If nothing else it 'flags' him up for the future.

They have clearly taken a line of closing ranks, and in the case of newspapers when its one persons word against another the case is too weak to risk libel.

As said above, a defence to libel is 'fair comment' but an allegation of sexual misconduct, unproven and unsubstantiated is not 'fair comment'. I think there is little more you can do OP except never go there again and be wary for yourself and DCs in similar circumstances.

I would be very unhappy that I had had to leave early because of this man. You should have a rebate for your holiday at the very least.

I don't know why they wouldn't do something with him. There are cases in the papers reasonably often where someone has been spying on a woman in public toilets - this is no different.

I dont think this is a minor thing either op,id be devastated.Poor you,i hope you get some more action taken.

Please don't forget the social services aspect here. This is a safeguarding issue and should be reported to social services. It is then up to SS to investigate and to decide what action, if any, to take. But they can't do anything to protect vulnerable adults and children if they don't even hear about it in the first place - and it sounds extremely unlikely that you can trust this company to do it.

Who knows, maybe there have been previous complaints about this individual, maybe even before he worked for this company - your report could be very important.

btw, Judgeflounce was a poster who purported to give people legal advice and was unmasked as a troll. Did an awful lot of damage before she was exposed. It was a horrible reminder that you don't know who a poster is or what expertise they have. There are plenty of people on here who do have specialist knowledge IRL and try to be helpful, but it is always worth checking advice on important issues such as medicine or law with a doctor or lawyer in real life. I am not suggesting anyone on this thread is behaving improperly at all - just pointing out a fundamental issue with chatrooms - you don't know who people really are.