Phil Groom writes:
Update 20/09/2008: Message for Pauline Edwards from ‘a concerned party’
I’ve contacted both Usdaw and the Bury St Edmunds Employment Tribunals office to request reports on today’s hearings: will post an update when I hear from them. Whilst we wait for that, thought I’d highlight some recent comments:
From dyfrig, September 17, 2008, we have some further analysis of Brewer’s response to Randy Williams’ motion for sanctions. Seems to me that Brewer is well and truly on the brink:
(yes, the same dyfrig whose comments are linked to by Randy Williams’ deposition).
If case filing in the US is anything like the UK, what Brewer is doing is simply laying out his stall of how his case will generally go – quite often, you simply say “Defendant denies the insertion in paragraph 4 of the plaintiff’s case”, so that the court knows where the areas of dispute are. At this stage this look like a skeleton document – the full details of why Brewer disagrees will come later.
As noted above, Brewer does admit that the action was wrong, to the extent that it was “ill-advised”, and shouldn’t have been brought. The question is whether Randy Williams is satisfied with getting him to admit that and taking the financial penalty, or wants to pursue the points of principle. Of course Brewer won’t admit to those points right now, partly because they come with further financial and professional sanction, but also because they would affect the ETs and any action the Charity Comms in England are thinking about.
Speaking as a lawyer, his deposition is the right way to go about it. The trustee has to decide (based on his assessment of the strength of his case) whether to take it further than this and put it in front of a court.
I’m very puzzled by one statement – I’m not sure a Director of a Company can legitimately claim to not know what the assets are, especially as it is the Directors who sign off on the Annual Report and Balance Sheet before it is presented to the AGM – admittedly, Saint Stephen the Great is so new (16th Feb 07) that no Accounts are yet due. However, to be acting properly as a Director Mr Brewer and is colleagues are legally obliged to submit accounts to Companies House of the state of their company at 16th Feb 08 by no later than 16th December this year. As they are 6 months overdue with their annual return (a simple piece of paper listing the names of the directors), it does not appear that they are very good at filing documents.
I suspect that few here need any further convincing of the Brewers’ bad faith, but for any who do, I think Neil Denham‘s recent observation of the Exeter shop back in business, trading under the SPCK name, says it loud and clear. Remember, this is the shop that made the headlines in Ruth Gledhill’s Times Online report in October last year as all the staff resigned and left Philip Brewer ruining the shop single-handedly (also reported in Christian Marketplace and by Dave Walker; the original story in the Exeter Express & Echo seems to have vanished). It was then put up for auction … then withdrawn from sale… so I guess it’s hardly surprising that they can’t make their minds up whether it’s open or closed:
Exeter shop open this week with ageny staff, sign in the window says “closing down” and everything is 40% off. The girls knew a little of what had gone on in the shop, but I suggested a bit of googling for them to entertain themselves… I am sure they will have found this blog by now!
(Hello girls, by the way, if you’ve found us: do feel free to leave a comment.)
But by far the worst example of the Brewers’ bad faith is shown by this heart cry from Pauline Edwards:
WHY Mr Brewer, did you ring me up to say you would pay me?
WHY Mr Brewer, did you build me up , just to knock me down again?
WHY MR Brewer, do you think its ok to treat people like this?
WHY Mr Brewer, do you keep playing mind games?
It has been a week since you have rang me, every day I have checked my bank account, even this morning, you have made me feel the way you did when you sacked me by E-mail on June 4th, you have made me feel the way you did on june 25th, when I had no wages, I just feel very low and sick again. By the way as I said to you I would drop the case if I had my wages, you didn’t keep to your side, so the case still stands this morning in court.
Words do not fail me: it’s just that the words that come to mind are not fit for publication…
From: a concerned party, September 20, 2008 at 2:25 am
Please forward a message to Pauline Edwards. Could not find an email access for her from all the comments on this site.
Do not know all details from past discussions stated on this site, but regarding monies to be sent to Ms. Edwards last week. The reality of that specific deposit is that it was not forth-coming due to Hurricane Ike, which hit Houston, Texas on Friday 12Sept’08. The 130 mph winds, rain and flooding knocked out over 4,000,000 homes & businesses leaving them without power, water and other services for many days. Some of the services have been restored, but as of today, power still has not been restored to over 2.5 million people; one of which is the entity that would make the deposit into Ms. Edwards account.
Finally today, after finding power miles outside of Houston to do internet connections, including Ms. Edward’s deposit through Natwest’s (the funding bank’s) commercial online banking system……. Natwest is now doing some type of maintenance until further notice. Therefore, please advise Ms. Edwards that her deposit will be done as soon as Natwest allows access to their commercial systems.
Again, this explanation is strictly to inform Ms. Edwards of the disposition of her deposit and is not to justify or requires any further discussion regarding the past problems Ms. Edward’s has encountered.
I have forwarded this to Pauline. Whoever you are, thank you; my thoughts and prayers are with you and all others affected by Hurricane Ike: very much appreciate your concern and effort in taking the time to provide this information.
— Phil Groom