Legal processes don’t work : or perhaps just work for solicitors?

[NamechangedforET]

I have brought a claim against my employers which is due to be heard in mid July. We are meant to be exchanging witness statements today. Their solicitors have asked to extend the deadline as they have more documents they want to disclose. They asked for a further two weeks : I suggested one week as I need time to consider their statements and prepare for the tribunal. Today they have informed me that they have more than 200 documents they want to disclose. How is that reasonable? I am a litigant in person, work full time and am disabled. How can I possibly deal with that? I have emailed the Court for advice (they gave today’s date in the Case Management Orders). Just utterly fed up : it’s impossible. How can we claim to have a fair and just legal system when it’s acceptable for solicitors to behave like this?

I am sorry. This is probably another stupid question.

I have been looking at the Case Management Orders. These say:

'no later than three days before the hearing, the Respondents shall send by email to [the tribunal] electronic copies of the papers to be presented at the hearing including the trial bundle , the witness statements , skeleton arguments or written openings and any other relevant documents, or a link to a website from which they can be downloaded' .

Ahhh: I haven’t done a skeleton argument. Should I have done? And if so do you think it’s possible for me to do one this week-end? I have read all the official guidance on being a litigant in person and they aren’t mentioned - have no idea how to do one but could google it? Would you recommend that I do this? Apologies but all the guidance I have read has been about witness statements and the bundle etc no mention of needing to a skeleton argument but, if necessary, am sure I could try.

Can anyone advise on this? Thank you

You can do a skeleton argument or a written opening - either will do. Simply write something that sets out the bare bones of your case. It should briefly describe the areas where you and your ex-employer disagree, giving a clear, concise, focussed summary of your case. If you want to refer to any legislation or case law, include that. Remember to say what you are asking the tribunal for.

As a litigant in person, they won't expect you to necessarily know all the ins and outs of preparing a skeleton argument or written opening, so try not to stress about it.

Your argument/opening should be as concise as possible. Unless this is a really complicated case, I'm sure you can do it in a weekend.

Thank you so very much.

If someone has given a witness statement but wasn't actually there,-so joined the company after the events happened, am I entitled to ask about this in my questions? For example one of the R witnesses (works for payroll) is claiming that they stopped a payment with my consent. This is completely untrue - they didn't inform/consult me at all. I didn't know about it until after it happened. There is no evidence of this 'agreement' in the bundle and the person who has put it in his witness statement didn't join the company until 5 months later. Can I query how/ on what basis he is making this claim?

I'm shocked by the outright lie - it's also quite difficult to prove that something didn't happen when it didn't? Or am I thinking about this incorrectly? Thank you.

Yes, you can challenge any of their evidence. The tribunal decides on the balance of probabilities. They have to prove their case

Just to say I got the Skeleton Argument in. Hooray! It's terrible and I could have done a much better job with more time but it is what it is. I didn't go to bed last night - up all night! But it's in. Hooray.

They have appointed a KC (eek). He has written that 'none of the PCP's actually constitute PCP's' , and as such part of my claim 'for failure to make reasonable adjustments must fall at the first hurdle'. I don't really understand what he means by this. I asked to be moved/for a new line manager , they did eventually get me one but it took nearly a year during which time I was on nil pay with all the consequences that entails. My Drs advised (and wrote reports saying) that I couldn't return to such a hostile environment.

Could it be that because they eventually did make the reasonable adjustments they are saying it doesn't constitute a PCP? if not I haven't a clue what he means...

Anyway thanks again for all your help and support. Regardless of what happens I am so very grateful.

The employer's barrister is acting for the employer. They cannot mislead the ET but they need to act for their client so will do everything they can to defend the case.

The KC is saying that whatever you have identified as a 'provision criterion or practice' aare not PCPs so the obligation to make reasonable adjustments doesn't kick in. You will need to argue that whatever you have identified as the pcp is something that puts you as a disabled employee at a substantial disadvantage.

Thank you for your reply.

I have been thinking about the challenge they have made and what my argument is (have no one to speak to irl so hope you don't mind my putting this here).

I was bullied by my line manager. Eventually had to go off sick (work related stress). I wanted to return to work as they know/there is evidence for but was told (as set out in the Respondents witnesss statements) that it was 'common/standard practice' that an employee has to return to the area from where they come.

This meant that I could only be managed by one of six people rather than one of 350 plus people that may have been an option had they not applied this practice. Unfortunately, according to the Respondent, none of those six people had capacity to line manage me for seven months. During this time I had to remain on sick leave, on nil pay and became extremely stressed/ anxious (fearing I was going to loose my job) which exacerbated my existing health conditions (I am disabled- would expand on the impact irl) and as such placed me at a substantial disadvantage compared to someone without a disability. Literally days after they found me a new line manager I was declared fit to return to work.

If they had adopted a different practice eg allowed one of the other 350 plus people employed by them (at the Grade above mine) to line manage me (by way of a reasonable adjustment) I may have been able to return to work sooner, my health may not have deteriorated further etc.

Will keep thinking and researching but it's a start?

I have received an email saying that due to a lack of judicial resources the tribunal currently does not have a judge to hear my case. The hearing is floating.

The email says If there is no judge available , the hearing may be postponed and re-listed at the next available date.

I tried to call them to see if I still need to turn up in the morning (assume I do) but there was no answer.

If it gets postponed does anyone know if you get much notice of the new date? Has anyone had anything similar happen to them? It's all a bit off putting. Dont know whether to be cramming or relaxing ....

Have taken annual leave for this so if it is cancelled will need to speak to work about what to do.

The Respondent has just sent me another witness statement at 18.10 . Its ridiculous.

And 'found' more documents they want to disclose. This system is crazy - it's so unfair. Doesn't matter how organised you try to be it doesn't really matter in the end. Its hardly a fair and just system...

Yes, you must turn up. When you finally do get in front of the tribunal, tell them about your ex-employer's blatant disregard for the case management order.

Thank you. Does anyone know if it doesn't go ahead how much notice you normally get of the new date ? or could it be anything from 24 hours to months?

Unfortunately they are still my employer so very tricky....

That shouldn't stop you raising their behaviour with the tribunal.

Hi

They have just informed me that the tribunal has been postponed- no judge or tribunal members available. I sat alone like a fool in the waiting room all morning. Lol. Ive asked when it is likely to be held - they said the earliest slot would be November but more likely next year. No idea how I am going to survive in work - it's horrific. I started crying which was really unfortunate.

When I arrived ACAS called to say the Respondent had offered 15k , no prejudice , settlement. I declined that offer and 30 minutes later they increased it to 30k. That still doesn't even cover the pay and pension that I lost let alone injury to feelings or psychiatric injury. I said I would get back to ACAS about their offer but assume as the hearing is now on hold that is forgotten about now?

It may not be what you want but I would take the £30k just for not having it hanging over you for another year. If you added up what it's costing you financially if you paid yourself minimum wage for all the work you need to do on it, not to mention the cost on your physical and mental health it doesn't seem worth it. If you haven't replied to the offer it should still be on the table and I would think they would have to honour it if it was sent through ACAS.

IANAL and you have had excellent advice (as always) from prh and others.

What I would suggest re the settlement offer, if it came via ACAS, would be to call ACAS back and ask if there was a specific time limit or other conditions on the offer.

No. It could not help. Don’t use these kinds of tools for legal matters or anything else important that requires correctness.

Are you mad? They doubled their offer within 30 minutes, OP wasn't even negotiating!

Hi OP
I think it's good news that they are considering a settlement. Have you calculated how much you are claiming and is the £30k they are offering close to the amount you are seeking?

Thank you for your replies. I provided details in the schedule of loss for loss of pay and pension, injury to feelings and psychiatric injury. Their offer (which I am not sure if it still stands given the hearing is now postponed and they said it was without prejudice and to bring about a quick resolution) was a about a quarter of what I asked for. I did a lot research and have evidence to support my claims but I am a litigant in Person so appreciate that it's easy for us to get things wrong!

ACAS dis say they dispute the injury to feelings and psychiatric injury - my drs are witnesses at the hearing so the intention was for them to provide more detail on this.

Thanks again for all your replies. I am very grateful.

Unless they say otherwise, the offer still stands. The without prejudice bit simply means neither side can refer to the offer in the hearing, if it gets that far. Given that they have already doubled their offer, I suspect they may go higher, particularly if you make a counter offer, i.e. say how much you want in order to settle. If you do counter offer, remember that they may well come back with an offer that is less than you are asking, so don't state your absolute minimum.

It's a personal decision, but if it were me, I'd see if they would settle for something like:

• 2/3 of the amount you are claiming
• an agreed form of reference

It removes a lot of the stress and risk of going to a tribunal if you can agree a settlement.
You can ask acas to try to assist with the negotiations.

It just gets worse. The Respondent has told the Tribunal Office that their counsel is unavailable this year and can only do May or November 2025.

I feel broken. I have already been waiting for circa 2 years for this case to go ahead and wanted resolution asap. They are still my employer and it is unbearable - I feel broken . I kept telling myself to keep going until the tribunal, then when it was cancelled I hoped it would be rescheduled to later this year but it's clear that won't happen now. It feels so unfair that claims that were submitted after mine will be heard before mine, that I have to continue alone with all this pressure. They know it is making me ill (have drs reports confirming this) and yet are allowed to push it so far back.

It will also put me at a disadvantage as my claims will be another 18 months older.... I have no doubt they will challenge my accounts on these grounds...

How is this process fair? They have huge resources and their lawyers can/ have played the system to their advantage. The justice system is clearly broken and unbalanced - favouring those with resource over those without regardless of the merits of the case.

Has anyone else been through this and if so how did you cope? I am feeling very low and would really appreciate any views/ experiences. Thank you. I am very grateful.

Tell the tribunal that their lack of counsel availability is not a reason to postpone a hearing.

Repeat the effect it's having on your mental health. They can instruct different counsel.