Crowdfunding and extortionate costs

[Honestopinion23]

I know that it's a travesty that women are having to bring these cases etc etc but I've just seen one GC feminist whose crowdfunding target is now £400,000, on top of a previous figure of £150k already raised. There are several other ones also asking for extremely high figures. I am just shocked that the costs could be so high (over half a million), even if the hearing is a lengthy one, and I worry that now cost of living is escalating that ordinary people won't be able to part with large amounts of cash. There's also something in me that says why should they have to. I know, I know, there is no obligation to donate but it makes me feel guilty reading the requests for funding. And I just feel a bit uncomfortable about the whole thing.
Hopefully JKR will swoop in and fund all of them!

I shall have to dissuade my children from applying to Bristol University. They are still too young, anyway, but I will not forget.

@chillied

I went to the Katie Alcock one but it says it isn't currently accepting donations? I think she will reopen when her next stage starts? If it's meant to be open right now then do say

You have the wrong one - check my Twitter.

@Aretina

I shall have to dissuade my children from applying to Bristol University. They are still too young, anyway, but I will not forget.

I went to a sixth form event run by the life sciences department there once. It was really nice. Also, fabulous architecture. I applied to do a life sciences degree there on the strength of it!

Rather glad I didn't go now, and hell would freeze over before I encouraged a teenage daughter to go there. Not after what I've read of Raquel's experience.

Over the past year I've switched from my regular charity donations to funding these causes. It's been over £500 so far. Thankfully I can afford it, but I am so incensed that we women are having to spend this money to defend our rights against twats who think that they can use nasty bully boy tactics to increase legal costs as a deterrent and yet STILL consider themselves to be the good guys in all this.

Hi everyone,
Thank you all for the very kind words and the donations. The situation in academia is unbearable and enough is enough. Please never apologise for however little you can donate: we really mean it when we say we appreciate every single cent. Just for clarity, my Crowdjustice page renews every 30 days automatically. I was really worried a few weeks ago because I had to pay my barrister (the excellent Alice de Coverley) and her chambers had been chasing me, but that's covered now. From now on, its about paying back the also excellent Amara Ahmad and Peter Daly from Doyle Clayton.

Just a comment: I've seen people on twitter sometime make snarky remarks about "all the money women are spending on these legal cases" and it strikes me as such a misogynist argument. If women spent £10 or £15 pounds on a handbag or a dress (or even on a lunch!) nobody would care at all, because those are the trivial things we are "supposed to care about." But some people really get upset seeing mostly women spend equivalent amounts on protecting and upholding our legal rights, which is far more long lasting and vital than, say, a hair appointment. Those arguments are just another way to try to remind us women to stay in our lanes and not demand more. As if to say: "Yes, women can make their own money. But don't get any weird ideas about how you want to spend it!"

Really glad you are covered for the moment Raquel. Will keep adding to the pot as and when I can.

I've been thinking very much of your situation, Racquel. I'm going to prioritise you on the basis that so many people will be aware of Allison and her case, and she will have more connections and a wider pool of awareness than you.

I haven't had time read the full thread, but what I want to know is what happens when women start winning their cases and receive their costs back from the other parties? As we (the GC general public) will have paid their costs, what arrangements have been made to pool the 'winnings' so that they can be used to fund future cases?

@Pluvia
I haven't had time read the full thread, but what I want to know is what happens when women start winning their cases and receive their costs back from the other parties? As we (the GC general public) will have paid their costs, what arrangements have been made to pool the 'winnings' so that they can be used to fund future cases?

Would they get their costs back even if the win? Someone answering on that Twitter thread (which had copied and pasted from this one) said that would never happen in tribunals like these.

I did a couple of tribunals years ago (don't judge! I represented my husband, he was very badly treated twice in three years....)

Tribunals themselves are actually free, it's the legal representation that costs the big bucks. As far as I remember, costs are only awarded against someone if it can be proven they have acted vexatiously, and that burden of proof is v v high. Unscrupulous, but perfectly legal, tactics would not merits costs.

But it protects both parties.

So as a grizzled old veteran of the ET courts, I am continuously frustrated by how incomprehensible and inaccessible it can be. It is designed so you should be easily able to represent yourself, but my husband and I went into court alone against a huge multi national corporation who had two members of the hr department, a v good barrister and he had a supporting clerk, plus their three witnesses.

Luckily, Rabbits are double hard bastards and somehow, although we did not win, we walked away with £5000 and the judge particularly commended me on how I had done.

It probably cost them upwards of £40k to defend. Cost me and my husband nothing except time (and a bit of stress)

Costs are rarely awarded in employment tribunals, unlike civil courts. The parties usually bear their own costs in the ET, whatever the outcome.

Good to read your update Racquel. It's amazing how many reactionary male transactivists there are who are continually surprised that we women earn our own money and are allowed to spend it where we choose without their permission .
One day they'll discover we're allowed to vote and then they'll self combust.

I'm not a lawyer but I was under the impression that a judge could award costs. If not we need to try to do something about that.

Like a previous poster, I was dragged through the legal process for three years by someone with mental health issues who dreamed up some bonkers, totally unevidenced, accusations against me. We ended up in court for five days. It cost me £200k and the judge awarded me what he noted was an almost unprecedented level of costs because there was clearly no case to answer. That was the civil court and not a tribunal. But surely the award of costs is part of the justice system?

@Pluvia

I've been thinking very much of your situation, Racquel. I'm going to prioritise you on the basis that so many people will be aware of Allison and her case, and she will have more connections and a wider pool of awareness than you.

I haven't had time read the full thread, but what I want to know is what happens when women start winning their cases and receive their costs back from the other parties? As we (the GC general public) will have paid their costs, what arrangements have been made to pool the 'winnings' so that they can be used to fund future cases?

Thank you, @Pluvia. That's really nice of you. Allison is kind of on a different level because Stonewall is such a massive octopus with tentacles everyone! But I trust that if anyone can take them on is her, and she'll hopefully win.

I don't know how other people would deal with their costs, especially in the Employment Tribunal, because mine is civil litigation. But if I were to be awarded costs back, I wouldn't want to keep any of it. Instead, I would donate it to charities that work around the themes of my case: VAWG, education and mental health.

And probably pledge a portion to similar sex and gender legal cases. For example, the Women Talk Back! case, which is very much alive but our solicitor is changing law firms right now and Crowdjustice rules stipulate that you have to create a new page and go through compliance at the new law firm when that happens. There's been lots of movement these past few months and we'll do a big update hopefully next week. It's all really pertinent in the context of the single-sex guidance from the EHRC that was published today.

Its great to hear from you Raquel. I have donated whenever I can, and have also donated to Alison because of the delaying tactics employed by Stonewall. I wish you all the best, you have already done so much by raising this issue and by sticking with it despite all the crap you've been though. Great to see you being name checked on the various newspaper forums as a real life example of how activists are going after women.

Even if costs are awarded, you never get the full amount back, I'm not quite sure how it works but there's a calculation and of course lots of legal argie bargie to come to an agreement. It could take many months to extract anything from the losing side. But with substantial up front funding hopefully there would be a surplus at the end, but it won't be for the full amount.

Just a comment: I've seen people on twitter sometime make snarky remarks about "all the money women are spending on these legal cases" and it strikes me as such a misogynist argument. If women spent £10 or £15 pounds on a handbag or a dress (or even on a lunch!) nobody would care at all, because those are the trivial things we are "supposed to care about." But some people really get upset seeing mostly women spend equivalent amounts on protecting and upholding our legal rights, which is far more long lasting and vital than, say, a hair appointment. Those arguments are just another way to try to remind us women to stay in our lanes and not demand more. As if to say: "Yes, women can make their own money. But don't get any weird ideas about how you want to spend it!"

You're so right, Raquel. I'll spend my money how I want and I will vote how I want, whatever scolds on social media think about it.

It is free to take your employer to tribunal, as long as your case meets minimum criteria, so if you choose to incur costs by hiring legal representatives that's up to you.

Imagine if you were liable for costs if you lost, that would dissuade many people from perusing their rights. Its why a lot of places settle before court in many cases even if there is not a particularly strong case against them, because tribunals do not award huge payments and it is often cheaper to give a few thousand than spend money on solicitors.

@Pluvia

I'm not a lawyer but I was under the impression that a judge could award costs. If not we need to try to do something about that.

Like a previous poster, I was dragged through the legal process for three years by someone with mental health issues who dreamed up some bonkers, totally unevidenced, accusations against me. We ended up in court for five days. It cost me £200k and the judge awarded me what he noted was an almost unprecedented level of costs because there was clearly no case to answer. That was the civil court and not a tribunal. But surely the award of costs is part of the justice system?

While this was good for you in your case, it is most certainly not something that should be changed in the employment tribunal because it would mean that many people wouldn’t get justice because the risk of costs would be too great. The system should stay as it is in the ET and I am relieved that Allison isn’t looking at potentially paying SW’s costs if she loses - that would bankrupt her.

Point taken. It makes me all the more furious that GC women are having to find, literally, millions of pounds to fight these cases. It feels like another element of the assault: a tax for being on the right side of history.

Thanks @KatieAlcock for pointing me to your Twitter to find your allotment. did a bit of digging.

Womanittee, I have checked my internet banking, and my donation to Raquel has gone through at the intended amount, even if the confirmation screen did claim I'd only donated zero pounds, zero pence.

So no need to fear on that score. Weird bug, but it's just a display error.

@chillied

Thanks *@KatieAlcock* for pointing me to your Twitter to find your allotment. did a bit of digging.

Thank you!

Gardening is a perfectly valid way to do what we can when we can to support our sisters. I really resent that the costs of justice are so high when you see those women who have little , contributing. So proud of everyone and especially Rosario Allison Katie and the others who have taken all the shit.

Thanks for this thread, I've donated towards Alison's legal costs, I'm praying she will get the right judge

In the last month I’ve contributed to Katie, Raquel, Shahrar, Emma and Allison’s fundraisers. There are many many good causes so ?i understand the desire to say surplus funds will go to a cause close to their heart but I would prefer to see all of these commit to any surplus funds/costs, if they are awarded, to go to another related crowdfunder.

I fund other charities separately to these legal crowdfunders and prefer to donate to them in a way where they can claim back gift aid.