Discussing UK law. Links: swarb.co.uk | law-index | Acts | Members Image galleries

Victimization not covered by Equality Act

Victimization not covered by Equality Act

Postby Beak » Mon Nov 06, 2017 5:54 pm

Hoping somebody can help. According to the equality act if you have one of the protected characteristics and you once brought or it was at least thought you were going to bring action under the ACT and as a consequence you received less favorable treatment you might have a case against that person or company

So what happens if you have none of the protected characteristics but have complained about the services you got from this organisation and as a result you received less favorable treatment. What are your options , is Victimization a tort ? This is non employment
Beak
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2017 5:46 pm

Re: Victimisation not covered by Equality Act

Postby atticus » Mon Nov 06, 2017 6:38 pm

You may - that is MAY - depending on the circumstances have a claim in contract or perhaps some tort such as negligence.

The Equality Act specifies what is unlawful discrimination. It is not unlawful to discriminate on other grounds. For example It is not unlawful to discriminate against a person who is so misguided as to be an Arsenal fan.
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 20271
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: Victimization not covered by Equality Act

Postby shootist » Mon Nov 06, 2017 6:47 pm

Beak wrote:So what happens if you have none of the protected characteristics but have complained about the services you got from this organisation and as a result you received less favorable treatment. What are your options , is Victimization a tort ? This is non employment


This is generally called 'Life'.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death my right to be offended by it."
User avatar
shootist
 
Posts: 3694
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 9:40 pm

Re: Victimization not covered by Equality Act

Postby Hairyloon » Mon Nov 06, 2017 8:03 pm

Beak wrote:So what happens if you have none of the protected characteristics but have complained about the services you got from this organisation and as a result you received less favorable treatment. What are your options , is Victimization a tort ? This is non employment


Why did you complain?
If the reason falls within your overall life philosophy then you might argue that the discrimination is on ground of belief.
For example, I am a Born Again Agnostic. We believe that if god does exist then he is overworked and it is therefore up to us to look out for each other; if he does not exist then the same point applies.
It is therefore incumbent upon all of us to take reasonable effort to address problems when we come upon them.
For example, if one were to encounter sub-standard service, it is our duty to make an appropriate complaint in order both to encourage the service provider to improve and to reduce the risk to other people of similar sub-standards.
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 10311
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Victimization not covered by Equality Act

Postby Beak » Mon Nov 06, 2017 9:33 pm

Actually that might work and had considered that, seems I got confused between victimization and discrimination, with victimization only applicable if you have made a complaint and then receive unfavorable treatment , wheres discrimination is more general and just requires some unfavorable is A person (A) discriminates against another (B) if, because of a protected characteristic, A treats B less favorably than A treats or would treat others.

I think it would be hard to say I was victimized as per the EA 2010 as it would be hard to argue that the organisation I was dealing with would of thought I would make a claim under that legislation.

Would a person always try to pursue a victimization claim over a discrimination one if possible ? I'm guessing higher damages are possible
Beak
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2017 5:46 pm

Re: Victimisation not covered by Equality Act

Postby atticus » Mon Nov 06, 2017 9:39 pm

A person would gather and analyse the facts. Those are absent from this thread.
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 20271
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: Victimization not covered by Equality Act

Postby Beak » Mon Nov 06, 2017 9:45 pm

atticus wrote:A person would gather and analyse the facts. Those are absent from this thread.


yes , they are and for good reason
Beak
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2017 5:46 pm

Re: Victimization not covered by Equality Act

Postby Hairyloon » Mon Nov 06, 2017 10:30 pm

Beak wrote:
atticus wrote:A person would gather and analyse the facts. Those are absent from this thread.


yes , they are and for good reason

Details are against forum rules for a start.

Beak wrote:I think it would be hard to say I was victimized as per the EA 2010 as it would be hard to argue that the organisation I was dealing with would of thought I would make a claim under that legislation.

It's "Would've", not "Would of". "Would of" is not even coherent in American. Sorry, but that is one mistake that I cannot tolerate.

Would a person always try to pursue a victimization claim over a discrimination one if possible ? I'm guessing higher damages are possible

Damages generally relate to what you have lost as a consequence. What name you put to the cause of that loss ought to be irrelevant.
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 10311
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Victimisation not covered by Equality Act

Postby atticus » Mon Nov 06, 2017 10:37 pm

Details are not against the forum rules per se. Details that may identify the parties are. The OP has chosen to give no fact. He says that whatever has happened does not engage the Equality Act. Absent any fact, that is both the beginning and the end.

And hairy has been remarkably tolerant of "would of" until this evening!
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 20271
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: Victimization not covered by Equality Act

Postby Hairyloon » Mon Nov 06, 2017 11:15 pm

Why do you object so to people trying to discuss the law absent of fact?
They seek an understanding of the law in order that they can apply that understanding to their facts. I know it is much easier to apply the law to a given set of facts than it is to cement an understanding, but the latter is by far a better result.

The assertion that the Equality Act does not engage is flawed because it is based on a false premise:

Beak wrote:So what happens if you have none of the protected characteristics...

Everybody has a gender.
Everybody has a sexual preference.
Everybody has a belief.
And everybody has a race, within the meaning of the Act.
Thus it is impossible to have none of the protected characteristics.
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 10311
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Next

Return to Torts - Negligence, Defamation and others

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest