The Register® — Biting the hand that feeds IT

Feeds

Nine-second delay sinks unfair dismissal claim

A case of unfair dismissal was not heard by an Employment Tribunal because the application was received nine seconds too late. The late submission was made by a law student charging £120 per hour. The case was dismissed by the Employment Tribunal and the Employment Appeals Tribunal (EAT) and details of the then-student's …

This topic is closed for new posts.
Graham Dawson
Coat

Wait...

I was always under the impression that the time something was sent was what mattered, not necessarily when it arrived. In the past I've successfully argued that bill payments were sent on time because the postmark is dated before the payment due date, even if the thing arrived after the due date (thanks to our wonderful postage system).

Stil... sending something at a minute before the absolute final deadline. Definitely a student.

SoupDragon

Please sir, the dog ate my electrons

Definitely a student!

untreated medical condition - I didn't know that laziness was classed as a medical condition...

prepared the claim form from scratch at a 30 wpm typing speed - surprising he didn't include Microsoft in the claim for losing his work or other such whining...

This is other people's livelihoods he is messing with, not just another project assignment, he needs a lesson in real life, I am sure that prison life will give him ample opportunity to mix with a potential new client base.

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

@Wait...

£120 per hour and late.... definitely a LAW student

Daniel

Re: Wait

This isn't a private industry that might be worried about customer satisfaction. It's the government. They set the rules to reflect their convenience, not the customer's. Since they state explicitly that the requirement is for when they receive it, the law student hasn't a case.

Rob
Go

Let's hope....

.... that he's found guilty and banned from practising law again. Seriously do we want numpties like this further expanding the legions of numpties we already have in the law system.

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

@wait

a post mark is offical, the timestamp of your own email server is not, only the recieving email server can be validated.

Mind you to realise it was late change clock and send in under 8 seconds is probably not possible.

The only claim would be a relay servers datestamp in the header but this is all waived by the recieved time disclaimer.

Paul Crawford
Thumb Up

Doh!

"The claim was sent by Neckles at one minute to midnight, but did not reach the servers of the Employment Tribunal until eight seconds after midnight"

And what joker would normally wait until the *very last minute* to submit something important?

Really, lets hope he (and others) learn to do stuff on time and with an adequate margin for realistic problems (server down, printer broken, ISP doing maintenance at 'porn surfing' hours, etc).

As said already, an obvious student...

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

Recorded When?

I wonder when the record the time of receipt? Is it at the very start of the script or is it after the message has been processed, validated and stored in their database. Admittedly, it would have to be a very complex or poorly written script if it takes 9 seconds to process a single claim, however it is a Government IT system.

Simon Williams
Thumb Up

And I thought it was just bad time planning

re: if he had a medical condition making it difficult for him to keep deadlines he should have proper systems in place once the claimant had put him in charge of the case.

So there could be a medical reason why I can't hit deadlines; this is good news.

Mike Moyle
Coat

Would all of this...

...make him The Famous (N)eckles...?

<Bluebottle>

YOU ROTTEN SWINE, YOU!

</Bluebottle>

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

GMT sync

I bet no-one checked the server's time against 'official' GMT.

It could turn out that the server was 10 seconds too fast.

A bit late to check now though.

This topic is closed for new posts.