Sainsbury's Supermarket Lying (Opinion)

Unspecified

Brother

#31 [Permalink] Posted on 4th December 2022 00:11

Assalamu Alaykum,

https://ibb.co/wYDfM0m

This matter is much more than just a personal matter.

More recently, I made a subject access request to Sainsbury's about certain emails and letters (written by me and sent to Sainsbury's customer services, Sainsbury's HR services and certain Sainsbury's stores) and how Sainsbury's solicitor "knew" that I "repeatedly" named certain Sainsbury's managers and called them liars and dishonest. All Sainsbury's have done is provided me with dates of emails and provided a copy of these emails. Sainsbury's have not shown me precisely where in those emails I allegedly "repeatedly" named certain Sainsbury's staff and called them liars.

I only called certain Sainsbury's staff liars once in those emails.

However, I did repeatedly name certain Sainsbury's managers and call them liars and dishonest in several letters that I wrote to three Sainsbury's stores where the staff connected to my dismissal were working. Sainsbury's solicitor claims that he never saw the letters that I sent to the Sainsbury's stores. Somehow, Sainsbury's solicitor "knew" that I repeatedly made allegations of dishonesty against certain named Sainsbury's staff without having seen my letters and somehow Sainsbury's solicitor made no mention that my repeated allegations of dishonesty against certain named Sainsbury's staff could potentially be defamatory when he first wrote to me after being instructed to do so by Sainsbury's colleagues.

I believe Sainsbury's is covering wrongdoing and this is a matter of concern to the public (disclosure in the public interest/ whistleblowing).

I have attached an image of my most recent email to my MP.

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

123abc

Unspecified

3,227

Brother

3,721

#32 [Permalink] Posted on 4th December 2022 01:32

123abc wrote:

View original post

Well you have my utmost respect and admiration for your persevarance in this matter and most people would not have the determination to stay the course.

As for your attachment it is not visible. You can try your MP and you can consult a solicitor about non disclosure.

Ultimately the question is what resolution or conclusion are you looking for. What outcome would make you happy.

Is it restoration of your job, compensation for an unfair dismissal etc. Or simple apology and change of procedures and practices by Sainsburys????

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

Abdur Rahman ibn Awf

Unspecified

3,227

Brother

3,721

#33 [Permalink] Posted on 4th December 2022 02:40

600

Bismillah..

For the benefit of others reading the thread.

The companies and organisations with integrity will resolve any complaints on the point of first contact.

But unfortunately most organisations these days especially government departments, have a policy of rejecting a persons initial complaint. They bank on the fact that the person who has complained will not pursue the issue further and will not seek legal advice. People find it too stressful think it will be pointless and give up at the first hurdle.

From my understanding this has been borrowed from insurance companies. Many of them had a policy of rejecting all initial claims several decades ago. Citing the small print in the contract. Erroneously telling cliamants they did not have a claim or make a long list of demands asking for various paper work from the claimant. Hoping the person would just give up.
And majority of people did give up after the first correspondence because it seemed like too much of an uphill task.

These days most organisations operate under the same policy. Local councils , housing departments, Department of Work and Pensions are notorious. As are many rogue corporations.

For example in recent years, the government has developed a policy that anyone who is on welfare benefits. If they are injured or sick they are asked to attend a health and fitness for work assesment by a suoposed medical professional this has been outsourced to some corporation . It is only a health assesment in name it is actually an interview like a police interrogation their objective is to declare the person fit and make the whole experience as stressful as possible.. on top of that instead of acquiring medical documents themselves which they can easily do from GP, Hospital, etc they put the onus on the claimant to acquire and provide these adding further obstacles. Of those claimants who appeal after the first rejection most win their case something like 70% win on appeal.

Unfortunately majority of people dont know how to appeal or where to get help many are in too much pain too ill too sick and too depressed and stressed that they dont bother appealing.

And the people at DWP are relying on the fact that majority wont appeal they also try to put people off by only giving them a limited number of weeks to appeal and stating that you can only appeal if you have new and additional medical evidence.

Thousands of people with disability have committed suicide as a result after the Tory government brought in this policy and disabled who were already on disability and not fit to work started being declared fit... Jeremy Corbyn for this reason was planning to do away with these sham assesments and going back to the old policy of relying on the assesment by the claimants own Doctor. He lost the election and Tories have double downed on this policy.

Most organisations and Government Departments, see the person who is complaining themselves by writing letters or e-mails as a non threat. So they just try to fob them off give them the run around. But those who complain via a solicitors letter are taken more seriously in those circumstance it is considered cheaper to settle the case amicably then going to court which might be more costly for them.

So lawyer up in these type of situations as soon as possible..., and on top of that if you are arrested by the police always ask for a lawyer. Surprising how many people refuse a lawyer thinking if they do ask for a Lawyer it will make them look guilty...No if you dont have a lawyer you will be like a Hen in a den full of Foxes. The police in their recorded interview will run rings around you and make you look as guilty as sin.Even if you are as innocent as a newborn baby.

report post quote code quick quote reply

+2 -0Like x 1Winner x 1

Abdur Rahman ibn Awf

Unspecified

Brother

#34 [Permalink] Posted on 4th December 2022 08:42

Here is the url link of the image I tried to show in my previous post https://ibb.co/wYDfM0m

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

123abc

Unspecified

3,227

Brother

3,721

#35 [Permalink] Posted on 4th December 2022 18:09

123abc wrote:

View original post

Bismillah.

My humble advice to you is to use language and words in a very simple and clear manner. And in a conversational tone as if you are explaining your story to a friend.

The language used should be so simple that even a 12 year old could understand.

At the moment your complaint does not come across as very clear. Are you aggrieved that the solicitor at Sainsburys has now falsely accused you of making defamatory statements against managers and staff in the past. By saying you called them dishonest and liars???

Or are you aggrieved that the Solicitor at Sainsburys, claimed that he had no knowledge of the letters you wrote years ago. But is at the same time contradicting himself by accusing you of writing letters years ago containing defamatory statements??? And do you want to know that how he could claim to have no knowledge of what transpired years ago, whilst at same time he is stating this is what you wrote previously.???

Or is it that Sainsburys solicitors is refusing to back up his accusations of defamation against you by providing proof of the content of your letters or e-mails from years ago.???

In anycase it is best to always save any correspondence of this manner. When you are engaged in a complaint procedure so that you personally have a record. So no one can falsely accuse you or distort what you stated.

Secondly if the managers did not take notes in your disciplinary hearing and they did not follow disciplinary procedures that are outlined in the employee handbook. Then you are fully justified in accusing them of lying and being dis-honest, so I dont see on what basis the Solicitor can accuse you of making defamatory statements. Or why you are worried about being accused of defamation when it is clearly not defamation.

Whatsmore I personally I dont see on what legal basis they can say you cannot share your correspondence about them. Without their permission. Most companies write in the small print that you are not allowed to share correspondence concerning them. Unless they have a court injuction or you are sharing something that is trademarked or patented there should be no legal requirement for you to seek their permission. Rather then seeking permission you should have asked them under what point of law or legal basis they are asking you to require their permission.

It seems this Sainsburys Solicitor is running rings around you and trying to confuse you with legal jargon.

I am not fully clear on everything that has transpired between you and them. So dont take the following as advice.

But personally if it was me, I would not have bothered seeking their permission. To share correspondence and I would have stood by the fact their managers are liars and dishonest. If you were still an employee then you would have had to tread more carefully for fear of being dismissed.

And after all has been said and done I am still not clear what outcome or conclusion you are seeking to this situation. With Sainsburys , an apology? Your job back? Compensation? All three of the above?

I am not sure your local MP will be clear on what exactly your issue is either. After reading your correspondence.

Or is your grievance that Sainsburys should improve the treatment of their staff.
This last one is easier what you would need to do is launch a campaign about Sainsburys treatment of its staff and work conditions in general. On various platforms. Be it an online petition a website/blog correspondence with the press and media, via youtube and social media etc. Sooner or later they will start taking notice, because of the bad publicity.

If its just about you and them and how they treated you the road will be alot harder. They will continue to stall, deny, deflect, make counter accusations. Keep you going around circles. Or simply stop responding by stating " We have discussed this matter with you at length, we are sorry you are still not satisfied. Unfortunately we have nothing further to add to what has already being stated, we believe that all further correspondence on this matter will be a pointless exercise."

And ALLAH knows best.

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

Abdur Rahman ibn Awf

Unspecified

Brother

Sainsbury's Supermarket Lying (Opinion)

Font Size

Font Weight