Employment Law

Joined
19 May 2007
Messages
881
Reaction score
9
Location
Dorset
Country
United Kingdom
Ok - Bahco, lets go hypothetical.

Your friend breached company rules placing bets with his employers.

He stole no money, committed no deception, did not falsely account for his bets, did not try to cover up his bets.... by say removing video footage, the company have absolutely no evidence of any dishonest intent to deprive the company of any item of value then..... He has committed no criminal offence and will not be charged or summoned to appear in court.

He is in breach of his company code of conduct and will likely face dismissal. However, as far as the Police are concerned they themselves can make the decision to cancel his bail and take no further action.

However, if there is some evidence of a criminal offence and if the local decision maker in the Police is a To55er, he may refer the file to the CPS for a decision. The CPS, if they decide to proceed with the case have to ensure that there is a likelihood of a successful prosecution in either Magistrates or Crown Court. Say 70% certain.

If what you say you have been told is true then he has nothing to worry about from a criminal point of view. Your mate is only daft and will likely pay a heavy penalty.

As far as suspension without pay is concerned. Your mate needs to check the Company's code for employee discipline. Suspension after the event is fair enough but I don't see how they can refuse to pay his wages up to that point.

I am not an expert on Company law however.

Hope that helps.
 
Sponsored Links
Joined
16 Oct 2006
Messages
3,762
Reaction score
130
Location
Lancashire
Country
United Kingdom
Hi Toptec.

Thanks for your reply, you obviously are clued up in these matters.

I believe I have all the facts and as it stands do you feel he has to worry about anything apart from placing bets whilst employed?

The worse thing that has happened here is, a statement, nothing wrong with a statement, When it's signed, it's legal., the police will not get involved unless it's criminal, a employee will be dealt with internally, unless fraud is involved


You haven't had the full story
 
Joined
19 May 2007
Messages
881
Reaction score
9
Location
Dorset
Country
United Kingdom
Libby - Sorry son but that is complete horlicks. If a statement is obtained under force, coercion or threats it is toilet paper. If a person making a statement is not properly advised - the statement is toilet paper.

There is a huge difference between a witness statement and a statement under caution. Sometimes even a witness statement can be useless.

A statement is only legal when all the codes of practice and Attorney General guidelines are adhered to. Only then is it "legal" to use your phrase. A statement properly obtained can be retracted at any time. BUT that retraction will have to be explained in detail in the witness box...........a very very lonely place. :)
 
Sponsored Links
Joined
16 Oct 2006
Messages
3,762
Reaction score
130
Location
Lancashire
Country
United Kingdom
Libby - Sorry son but that is complete horlicks. If a statement is obtained under force, coercion or threats it is toilet paper. If a person making a statement is not properly advised - the statement is toilet paper.

Sorry didn't sees the forced bit
If everything else you say is correct

Atorney who?
 
Joined
21 Oct 2004
Messages
19,558
Reaction score
25
Country
United Kingdom
Hi Toptec.

Thanks for your reply, you obviously are clued up in these matters.
That's odd - I was just thinking that he obviously isn't.

He stole no money...
He didn't obtain the money honestly, and with the owner's knowledge and permission. How is that not theft?

...committed no deception, did not falsely account for his bets, did not try to cover up his bets.... by say removing video footage, the company have absolutely no evidence of any dishonest intent to deprive the company of any item of value then.
You don't know any of that, but if you're right, then how could the police have charged and bailed him?

He has committed no criminal offence and will not be charged or summoned to appear in court.
:rolleyes:

He is in breach of his company code of conduct and will likely face dismissal.
He's already resigned. WAKE UP!

However, if there is some evidence of a criminal offence and if the local decision maker in the Police is a To55er, he may refer the file to the CPS for a decision.
Under what circumstances would you consider a police officer to be simply doing his job, rather than being "a To55er", if he referred an instance of theft for prosecution?

Say 70% certain.
70% certain.

There - I've said it.

If what you say you have been told is true then he has nothing to worry about from a criminal point of view. Your mate is only daft and will likely pay a heavy penalty.
Penalty? Heavy? To whom? And in what form?

As far as suspension without pay is concerned. Your mate needs to check the Company's code for employee discipline. Suspension after the event is fair enough but I don't see how they can refuse to pay his wages up to that point.
Nobody has said that they're refusing to pay wages due. You're just making things up as you go along.

I am not an expert on Company law however.
No. Really? :eek:

And what relevance does "Company law" (sic.) have in this situation?

If a statement is obtained under force, coercion or threats it is toilet paper. If a person making a statement is not properly advised - the statement is toilet paper.
The employee has, in effect, written a letter to his employer, not made a statement to the police. You are confused.

A statement is only legal when all the codes of practice and Attorney General guidelines are adhered to.
Utter gibberish. There is specific legislation that governs police interviews and the gathering of evidence. Do you know what the legislation is called?

A statement properly obtained can be retracted at any time.
Are you reading this stuff out of a comic?
 
Joined
21 Oct 2004
Messages
19,558
Reaction score
25
Country
United Kingdom
Nobody has said that they're refusing to pay wages due. You're just making things up as you go along.
He has been suspended without pay.
1. Being suspended without pay is not the same as withholding wages that are normally paid in arrears. It amounts to being summarily sacked and given notice. Depending on contract and on length of continuous service, he might, or might not, be entitled to any notice. In the latter case there is no pay due, therefore no refusal.

2. You've carefully picked merely one of the many conflicting bits of information that Bahco has posted, but....

Sorry I should said that he resigned not long after he was interviewed in July. :oops:

If you're gonna do it, do it right.
:idea:
 
Joined
8 Feb 2004
Messages
8,022
Reaction score
148
Location
Wolverhampton
Country
United Kingdom
You've carefully picked merely one of the many conflicting bits of information that Bahco has posted,

Mmmm, I thought I had given the full picture quite accurately but will take it on the chin if not.

Please point out what I have said that is conflicting. :confused:
 
Joined
21 Oct 2004
Messages
19,558
Reaction score
25
Country
United Kingdom
I didn't want to go down this road, Bahco, because I didn't mean it personally - I took it that you'd been drip-fed the details yourself, not that you'd got it wrong.

However, I shouldn't have used the word "conflicting" regarding the point about resigning. I've only just noticed that your OP was back in June, i.e. before he resigned. That doesn't change the nub of my point to blondini, but I do humbly apologise.

Regarding my use of the word "many", I don't have time right now to comb the topic, so I readily retract that and apologise again.
 
Joined
8 Feb 2004
Messages
8,022
Reaction score
148
Location
Wolverhampton
Country
United Kingdom
No problem Softus. :D

I will keep you all informed (with my friends pemission of course who allowed me to post this and listen to others views)
 
Joined
19 May 2007
Messages
881
Reaction score
9
Location
Dorset
Country
United Kingdom
That's odd - I was just thinking that he obviously isn't.

You are welcome to your opinion. Others draw their own conclusions.

He didn't obtain the money honestly, and with the owner's knowledge and permission. How is that not theft?

Read the post properly Softus. The word "Hypothetically" appears at the start of the reply to Bahco.

You don't know any of that, but if you're right, then how could the police have charged and bailed him?

"Hypothetically" :rolleyes:


Did you miss a comment here?????? ;)

He's already resigned. WAKE UP!

Ok, splitting hairs, but fair point.

Under what circumstances would you consider a police officer to be simply doing his job, rather than being "a To55er", if he referred an instance of theft for prosecution?

The criminal Justice Units within the Police are renowned for having some idiots who are paid to make decisions - They are called "Decision Makers". Unfortunately, lots of them are ex-Traffic/Uniform with no experience in complex criminal matters so rather than nip any pointless prosecution case in the bud, saving money and grief to those involved they refer it to the CPS, pushing the responsibility onto them.

70% certain.

There - I've said it.

You are a funny Guy Softus. :cry:

Penalty? Heavy? To whom? And in what form?

I was referring to his dismissal. Loss of job, mortgage, ability to find employment in the same field who knows..... The point is that to most it is a heavy penalty for a stupid action.

Nobody has said that they're refusing to pay wages due. You're just making things up as you go along.

I probably should of used the word "could" instead of can with regard the company.

No. Really? :eek:

A pathetic jibe :rolleyes:

And what relevance does "Company law" (sic.) have in this situation?

I apologise - Should of said "Employment law". Silly me. :rolleyes:

The employee has, in effect, written a letter to his employer, not made a statement to the police. You are confused.

No. Bahco says he has made a statement. That implys a more formal document than a letter.

Utter gibberish. There is specific legislation that governs police interviews and the gathering of evidence. Do you know what the legislation is called?

Um......... Yes. Before I tell you the answer, I gave you a clue. ---- Code of Practice --- do you want another clue?

Are you reading this stuff out of a comic?

Explain please. What I said is a fact of the Criminal Justice System not something you have seen on a TV show.

Finally a couple of comments regarding my post to Bahco. If I had known it would have been dissected by a barrack room lawyer I would have made sure it was prepared to the same standards as the thousands of statements I have taken over the years.

Secondly, I don't know if you are playing games, winding people up for a laugh or what. But some of the questions posted by people on this forum are being hi-jacked by you engaging in a pathetic fencing match with your chosen target for the day. It was obviously my turn.

Careful examination of your posts reveal very little advice but much criticism. It does you no credit. :)
 
Sponsored Links
Top