u/MrLuchador

Respondent have disclosed their documents, but I'm required to log in through a microsoft system to access them from their solicitor's portal, which asks for permissions to access my data...

I've asked them to share them in a way that doesn't require a log in, or access to my data.

Permissions requested by:

By accepting, you allow this organization to:

Receive your profile data

Collect and log your activity

Use your profile data and activity data

You should only accept if you trust XXX

You can update these permissions at https://myaccount.microsoft.com/organizations.

This resource is not shared by Microsoft.

Let me preface this with:

I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice. If you can afford or find a representative, do so. It will save you a lot of time, pressure and stress.

I did find Citizen Advice and the local Universities with Law students to be very helpful

--

From the outset the Respondent will leave it until the day before/of to reply with any ACAS deadline in terms of Early Concilliation. They're testing to see if you've followed the procedure, and hoping you've missed something so they can throw it all out.

The Respondent will test your ET1 and will more than likely ask for further particulars. This is to delay and test you, hoping you'll stumble and give up. They will tell you your claims have no merit.

The Respondent will try and assert your claims are not in the ET1 form. Be confident in your claims and clear up any misunderstanding. Do not let the Respondent drive an early narrative.

The Respondetn will deny disability claims and knowledge. This is to put the burden on the claimant to prove their disability, even if The Respondent did know. This is another test to see if you'll give up or not.

Read The Respondent's ET3/Ground of Resistance carefully. What are they saying. What words are they using. HOW are they wording any admission/liability? Does it match with what your claims are, or does it cloud matters and provide a sideplot? For example, if they do admit Claimant is disabled, what disability are they claiming knowledge of. Is it the same you're claiming?

If The Respondent is in control of the CM Agenda document, make sure you have been able to read it and add any relevant information you might rely on such as (but not limited to) 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 2.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.7, 3.9, 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 8.1, 9.1-9.10, 13.1, 13.2, 13.3, 13.4, 13.5,

If the ET asks The Respondent to provide templates or to submit agreed bundles, always check the bundle and raise early protests if things are excluded or edited without your approval. Remember, the Solicitor works for The Respondent not you.

They might have provided a template for the List of Issues, but read it. What HAVEN'T they included in the List of Issues template in terms of legal tests and questions for the ET. HOW have they worded the legal challenges and questions that are included.

Always work on your own documents alongside the template versions provided, so you can easily track any changes (agreed or otherwise), and have something to submit of The Respondent "forgets" to submit.

Always keep track of WHEN The Respondent engages with you. Do they provide enough time before deadlines for a LiP to fully cooperate and be involved in the process. Have you communicated with The Respondent of times you are NOT available. If you have a family are weekends out of bounds, for example.

If there are issues with the way The Respondent is engaging with you, email The Respondent first and explain why what they're doing is causing a problem. Offer a solution and ask for clarification they understand. Email the Tribunal raising the issue if The Respondent continues.

It is very unlikely The Respondent will accept liability for anything during any potential settlement talks.

Listen to what the ETJ is saying and what they're NOT saying. They cannot give you explicit advice, but they can provide guidiance.

Always take notes during any CM Hearing. CM Orders can take a LONG time to arrive, sometimes even after deadlines. Do not let The Respondent drive a narrative that CM Orders said this or that.

If you haven't agreed to something, explicity state so in the correspondence with The Respondent. Do not let them create the impression you have agreed to a List of Issues (if you have not), or by not disagreeing you must have agreed to whatever wording they've used, etc.

Keep track of all jobs you've applied for, especially ones within your sector if you're claiming unfair dismissal. This can be particular helpful for the ET if you can show your dismissal has impacted your prospects within the sector, and The Respondent had some sort of influence (such as regulator, governing body, etc).

Do not feel conflicted in your claims or compensation, even if The Respondent is a charity and/or public sector. You are not stealing money away.

Remember the Respondent's solicitor works for the Respondent. They're not going to do your job for you.