WRAGGE & CO SOLICITORS

dun24.jpg

Wragge & Co solicitors acted unlawfully, by purposely submitting a "false instrument" into the Employment Tribunal Services, which is part of HMCTS.

Still to this day, no one (solicitors, government, etc) can understand or give a reason on why a false instrument was allowed to become legally binding.  It remains unanswered (covered up) by HMCTS!

This is a timeline of events that took place where Wragge & Co solicitors, who were acting on behalf of Dunlop Tyres Ltd, illegally terminated my employment contract with the help of Gateshead Citizens Advice Buereau.

Wragge & Co solicitors were the representatives of Dunlop Tyres Ltd when I placed an IT1 form in to the Employment Tribunals for my claim of disability discrimination.

Wragge & Co solicitors replied with an IT3 form which was submitted into the Employment Tribunals to strike me out of any claim.

A hearing was held in the Employment Tribunal Services building in front of a Chairman.

 

The IT3 form claimed I was not disabled, so Dunlop could not be guilty of disability discrimination.

The Chairman of the tribunal took one glance at my medical records and struck Dunlop Tyres out straight away.  My claim for disability discrimination against Dunlop Tyres was allowed to proceed.

75baf3_b1a911786120447694175f86d31f80c9~

Wragge & Co then produced another IT3 form, which basically stated the opposite of the original IT3 form.  I thought this was proof that it was nothing but lies (which it was) straight away.

 

I had 100% confidence that I would win my claim against Dunlop Tyres Ltd.

 

Up until 12 August 2003, I dealt with Wragge & Co solicitors.  They knew I would refuse to negotiate any settlement that included the termination of my employment contract!

 

I was sent correspondence dated 13 August 2003, where Wragge & Co state that they will only have contact with my representative from now on.

gatcab.png

The only contact that was made between my representative and Wragge & Co solicitors were discussions regarding a settlement that included the termination of my employment contract.

It is included in Wragge & Co notes, how I told my rep that I was “not amenable to these suggestions”, regarding being made unemployed, but how my rep would see whether I would change my mind in order to get some sort of discussions on the road.

It is also stated in their notes, how I told my rep on the 15 August, so my rep stated “Mr Nesbitt is currently convinced that without Dunlop his life will amount to nothing and he will never be able to get another job” to Wragge & Co solicitors.

 

So it is without doubt that my mind simply could not be changed.

stubborn.jpg

But 15 August 2003 is when the Wragge & Co solicitor representing Dunlop tyres stated to ACAS “that it looked likely that settlement may be reached next week”.

 

The ACAS conciliator replied by saying that he “was not available on Monday because he was having a long weekend”.  Then went on to say that “he would be prepared to sign it off on Tuesday on the basis he had been involved all along”.

 

It was Monday 18 August when a COT3 agreement became legally binding.  The very day the ACAS conciliator was not at work.

 

By law, it is ACAS’s duty to inform the Employment Tribunals of a COT3 settlement and by law, a COT3 form is an “ACAS COT3 Form”, completed by an ACAS officer.

 

But it was Wragge & Co solicitors who submitted a fraudulent document/false instrument into the Employment Tribunals Service which is part of HM Court and Tribunals Service.

 

Something that cannot be disputed, is by law, anyone who submits a false instrument into court is committing an illegal offence!

 

Here is a copy of the document that Wragge & Co solicitors submitted into the Employment Tribunals office by fax.

cot3 1.png
cot3 2.png

As stated by Lady Justice Smith at the Royal Courts of Justice in my case, “For the settlement to be binding, it had to be recorded on form COT3, completed by an ACAS officer”.

 

This form is not recorded on a “form COT3” and has never been “completed by an ACAS officer” but did become legally binding.

 

So after all these years, the question remains, who is to blame for the fraudulent document/false instrument becoming legally binding?

 

H M Court and Tribunals Service did allow an illegal document to become legally binding against me and there is nothing I can do about it.

MY VERDICT

Over the many years that I have dealt with this issue, it has been totally clear to me that professional solicitors can tell as many lies as they like in court and submit false instruments. 

 

And no matter what they say or submit into H M Court and Tribunals Service, it is believed and automatically accepted without any questions being asked! 

verdict (2).jpg

And after lies, deceit, forgery, fraud, corruption, etc, my case is proof that there is absolutely nothing a victim of an illegal offence (submitting a false instrument) can do about it!

 

So the simple fact is that this is a cover up by H M Court and Tribunals Service!

 

So make your own minds up whether you believe the court system is fair or not.

 

This is why I now refer to it as The Great British (il)legal System.

 

 

I also have lots of important notes written by Wragge & Co solicitors, how Wilf Holt of Gateshead CAB stated the truth over the phone (what I had said to him) to them.  Then how he wrote the opposite down in his own notes (what I never said to him).  But the court system believed his notes, which were total lies!

 

I will address this and go into everything in more detail on this site in due course.

THE GREAT BRITISH

(il)LEGAL SYSTEM

 is helping CAB make me homeless