Background
A driver submitted a claim to Acas, alleging that the company he provided services to had failed to pay him the correct rate, instead paying only his induction rate. The driver also claimed he was effectively employed by the company, citing rules that required him to complete at least 80% of his route in order to be paid – arguing that this indicated an employer-employee relationship.
The business initially sought guidance from the parcel network, but the response offered little support and simply advised them to ignore any correspondence from Acas. This left the business in a stressful situation, with the driver applying pressure to settle the matter.
In an effort to resolve the issue, the business agreed to settle for £220, hoping to bring it to a close. However, the situation escalated when another email was received from Acas stating that the driver had made a counteroffer of £480, now including additional allegations of assault and harassment – claims made without any substantial supporting evidence.
The challenge
- The driver had initially accepted a low settlement offer, but after accepting, a counteroffer for a significantly higher amount was made, adding more allegations without evidence.
- The Acas mediation process seemed biased towards the driver, putting them in a challenging position.
- A swift resolution was needed to avoid further escalation and unnecessary legal complications.
The solution
Wise was brought in to handle the situation and quickly take action to mitigate the risk to our client. Our approach involved:
- Drafting all responses to Acas: We carefully constructed responses on behalf of the business, clearly outlining why the counteroffer was unjustified and the lack of evidence for the additional claims of assault and harassment.
- Calling Acas: We took a proactive approach by contacting Acas directly to challenge the mediation process. During the call, we pointed out that, once a claim was accepted, counteroffers should not be allowed to be made under contract law, rather than employment law. This intervention highlighted the procedural issues in the mediation process.
- Acas’s mediation process: We voiced our concerns about Acas acting partially and biased towards the driver, which is contrary to their role as a neutral mediator. This was crucial in bringing the issue to light and showing that the process was not fair.
- Final response: After addressing these concerns, we drafted a final response to Acas, clearly declining the driver’s counteroffer. We emphasised the lack of evidence, the biased mediation process, and other contractual issues that made the counteroffer unjustifiable.
The outcome
Through our strong intervention, we successfully reduced the driver’s counteroffer from £480 to £300, representing a £180 reduction. The claim was settled and the agreement legally binding in less than a week. The business avoided the threat of further escalation and reached a favorable settlement without the need for extended mediation or legal proceedings.
Support provided by Wise
- Drafted all responses to Acas on behalf of our client, ensuring that the company’s position was clearly communicated and legally sound.
- Provided immediate action, allowing the business to avoid delays and reduce stress.
- Intervened directly with Acas to challenge the process and ensure fair mediation.
- Delivered a legally binding settlement agreement, reducing the original claim significantly.
