£13000 - Money well spent?

[Blasphemous]

What to make of all this I'm not really sure. I mean, the 'employer' did what he wanted to do (rightly or wrongly), and yet he chose not to follow that through the courts....? Surely you'd want to ensure that someone who stole from you gained nothing from the whole episode?

Essex businessman pays out over 'thief' sign.

A businessman who placed a sign saying "thief" around an employee and marched him to a police station has had to pay him £13,000.

Simon Cremer claimed Mark Gilbert had stolen a cheque for £845 from him.

But Mr Gilbert, who claims he was owed the cash, is understood to have sued his former employer for the distress and humiliation caused.

Mr Cremer, who runs a flooring business in Witham, Essex, said lawyers had advised him to settle out of court.
Charges dropped

He said: "I am very disappointed. I am very dissatisfied with the legal system.

"My legal team advised it would be cheaper to settle than go to court - which could have cost £20,000, that is money I don't have."

Mr Cremer, 46, and the three employees were arrested and accused of false imprisonment following the incident in September 2008, but the charges were later dropped.

Mr Gilbert was marched through Witham with the sign dangling from his neck.

The sign, written on cardboard, said: "THIEF. I stole £845 am on my way to police station."

But Mr Gilbert, 40, told a newspaper that he had been owed wages - a claim denied by Mr Cremer.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-12473446

 

[SALL2009]

Definitely money well spent. The employer will hopefully get the money paid by some news paper. If only this was done more often.

The judge should have laughed at the claimant and dismissed the case.

 

[inkypinky]

no employer is supposed to treat his employees the way he did...

what if his customers do the same to him for not doing good job...you have to treat people properly

 

[joinerjohn]

The world has gone mad. That businessman only did what a lot of us would feel like doing, to shame the thieving employee. Whatever happened to the rights of the employer to not have money stolen from him ?

 

[inkypinky]

Whatever happened to the rights of the employer to not have money stolen from him ?

they still have that right, calling police and recovering money would have been the way.... but they will not be given right to humiliate someone like this...

 

[joinerjohn]

they still have that right, calling police and recovering money would have been the way.... but they will not be given right to humiliate someone like this...

The thief needs humiliating quite honestly and got no less than he deserved. Too much is said about the rights of criminals today and not enough done about upholding the rights of victims. Do you honestly think it's right and fair that the business man has now had to pay £13000 for being the original victim, whilst the thief seems to have gotten off scot free and had compensation for his crime?
Just a shame there are not more public spirited people like him.

 

[Deleted member 105431]

It's typical of this countrys legal system to give a thief £13k.

 

[WestmidsChippy]

**** OFF!

That judge needs a kicking and anyone else who agrees with him starting with that inky.

 

[LooPrEvil]

It says the charges were later dropped (against the employee).

The employee was therefore correct to claim against the employer for vilification.

It was a cheque so ownership of the intended funds would be easy to prove anyway

 

[delboybully]

Whatever happened to the rights of the employer to not have money stolen from him ?

they still have that right, calling police and recovering money would have been the way.... but they will not be given right to humiliate someone like this...

HAHAHA

The police do their job,no chance as half the time they cant be bothered and the other half they have their hands tied behind their backs.

£13K for being taken to a police station with a sign saying 'thief' around his neck. HOW MUCH!!! Thats ridiculous. The system we have makes mugs out of the general public!

The guy was a thief but he used the system to extract money out of an ordinary employer

 

[Gasman77]

Have you seen the guy getting interviewed about it? the actual cost was £34,000 he told sky, not the £13000 they claimed.

The Thief got £4k
The Gent had to pay court costs and his own solicitors fees of £5k
The Theifs solicitors charged......£25k!!!!

Poor fella said he will have to sell his house to pay for it all......

 

[delboybully]

Have you seen the guy getting interviewed about it? the actual cost was £34,000 he told sky, not the £13000 they claimed.

The Thief got £4k
The Gent had to pay court costs and his own solicitors fees of £5k
The Theifs solicitors charged......£25k!!!!

Poor fella said he will have to sell his house to pay for it all......

Thiefs and solicitors, sometimes i cant tell the difference

 

[Alarm]

Bottom line is THEY WERE BOTH WRONG.

Only winners as per were the legal teams.

 

[inkypinky]

The thief needs humiliating quite honestly and got no less than he deserved. Too much is said about the rights of criminals today and not enough done about upholding the rights of victims. Do you honestly think it's right and fair that the business man has now had to pay £13000 for being the original victim, whilst the thief seems to have gotten off scot free and had compensation for his crime?
Just a shame there are not more public spirited people like him.

The Thief should have sent to Jail for 5 years or much more strict punishment as in Middle East but that should be decided by Judge...but if the employer has humiliated him and he tried to do justice himself he should be fined as well.

The whole problem is the legal system is very soft and it is soft because this nation cannot afford to support the cost for keeping people under control....

 

[Norcon]

At the end of the day the thiefs name is mud. Who would employ him now and risk a double shafting like that?
And £4k won't last very long.
The employer should just put it down to experience and try not to take the law into his own hands again in the future.

It was only £845 quid after all and if this thief had been doing his job for a while then he would have earned it and more so no loss to the employer anyway.