Potential claims against the UK profession(s)

Discussion in 'General study / exams' started by whistleblower21, Jun 11, 2019.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. ProudActuary

    ProudActuary Member

    Factually untrue, the claimant's 3rd claim in this case failed. Other legal action (eg 2017 case) against the IFoA failed. Does this mean that the claimant in that case wasted their own money on an expensive, failed claim? Just using your words in your above post.
     
  2. Null

    Null Member

    the ifoa are not going to win in the end. They have lied in court, fudged statistics, botched mutual recognition agreements and are proven discriminators. They have wasted an extortionate amount of members money on legal defence when they are guilty as sin
     
  3. chenbod

    chenbod Member

    Legal representation isnt needed for claims in the Employment Tribunal. Most Actuaries can get their head around the law and fight it themselves, however representation can make it easier.
    I would suggest that more members litigate against them to find out what the IFoA are really like.

    What do you think about the IFoA withholding key evidence relating to the AAE claim?? Had they disclosed it, the claimant might have won that third claim.
     
  4. ProudActuary

    ProudActuary Member

    Other posters have spoke of the significant expense associated with litigation, perhaps they can advise. You seem to be keen to litigate andNull/almost_there/whistleblower all seem to be familiar with pursuing legal action so I'm sure they'll be delighted to add another supporter. If you are female then I believe they are considering litigation against the IFoA so perhaps you could join their merry band.

    I planned my summer holiday around the exams once meaning I had to go slightly earlier in the year during peak season. Had I been admitted to the IAI I would've been able to go a little later and save some money. Would you recommend I litigate against the IFoA on this basis?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 21, 2019
  5. ProudActuary

    ProudActuary Member

    Curious, someone who was complaining about not getting the chance to sit 4 exam sittings a year rather than 2 with the same number of subjects is now complaining about an increase in exams with a lower number of subjects. Null also claimed that it would be a super advantage to have multiple sittings incase one had an 'off day'. The use of excel/R surely provides this extra level of comfort, no?
     
  6. almost_there

    almost_there Member

    I think he would have. The only people who think European quals just as good as Fellowship are IFoA within the 4 walls of the Court.
     
    Null likes this.
  7. almost_there

    almost_there Member

    Now that IFoA have suffered adverse publicity in a global publication, there is little point in Proud continuing his one man campaign to spin otherwise.
     
    Null likes this.
  8. almost_there

    almost_there Member

    Crowdfunding is also an option to fund claims that would benefit thousands. There may be wealthy people out there appalled at IFoA discriminating against British nationals who might be up for bankrolling such action to teach IFoA a lesson.
     
    Null likes this.
  9. ProudActuary

    ProudActuary Member

    Lol
     
  10. ProudActuary

    ProudActuary Member

    Good luck with setting out the rationale for your claims on a crowd sourcing page. You've struggled to even set out the rationale for this alleged gender discrimination on this forum!

    So litigation is an expensive thing to do then? You had any experience of it?

    You seem to give the impression of knowing a little about it, but then are notable in attempts to avoid answering whether or not you've litigated against the IFoA.
     
  11. chenbod

    chenbod Member

    Calm down and drinks some camomile tea.
    First and foremost, you do not have a cause of action. If you did, I would help you bring a claim.
    Furthermore, you seem to have a rather obscure understanding of the law. I suggest that you visit the Citizens advice bureau.
    Why are you against people litigating against the IFoA?? Have you ever litigated??
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 21, 2019
  12. chenbod

    chenbod Member

    I wouldnt plan any summer holiday if I were you...... because the fees are going up due to unlawful discrimination and it might dent your budget
     
  13. ProudActuary

    ProudActuary Member

    It's remarkable - you seem to be posting very similar, in fact, identical posts to whistleblower. Speaking of which, I haven't seem them around recently...
     
  14. almost_there

    almost_there Member

    I hear rumours of a wealthy donor a patriotic British businessman, not happy at all with IFoA's discrimination...
     
  15. Null

    Null Member

    I tried to state my viewpoint on here and I was blocked and my opinions edited. This forum is not a place where you can have a free and honest discussion

    So where do you work then?
     
  16. ProudActuary

    ProudActuary Member

    Other posters seem to suggest that the costs of litigation are low. Why would it matter if you have a "wealthy donor"?
     
  17. almost_there

    almost_there Member

    You tell us how much IFoA spent on this litigation. Thought you were going to email them with questions. I imagine they will refuse to tell their members how their money is spent, as usual.
     
  18. studier

    studier Member

    I agree that there are more separate exam papers although I believe the same amount of total exam hours.

    However I was pointing out the fact the in coming up with a figure of 15 exams under the old curriculum, you must have classed the 2 CA1 papers as a single exam and the two CA2 papers as a single exam. Why then do you treat the treat the 2 papers sat for each of the CMs and CSs as two separate exams when like CA1 and CA2, a pass is based on the overall performance?

    Anyway, surely what bothers most people is the overall amount of time spent doing exams, not the number of individual papers?
    (I do appreciate that this doesn't hold for people who have not completed their CTs before the change of curriculum.)

    As Proud pointed out earlier doesn't having two papers on two days sit better with the one of the arguments behind your claim against the IFoA; that it allows for an off day?

    Additionally, I believe that you are the claimant and I am intrigued by the following statement in the judgement:

    "87. From the Claimant’s exam records, the Claimant sat the CT4 exam twice in 2017, in April and September, but, unfortunately for him, he failed both times. He did not sit any exams in 2018. The Claimant explained to the Tribunal that he was largely taken up with this litigation during 2018."

    If you are that bothered about qualifying but don't want to have to effectively resit exams that you have passed (for which I do feel sorry for you for), wouldn't you have been better using your time to attempt exams in the last two sittings under the old curriculum than focus on the litigation?
     
    Marzipan likes this.
  19. almost_there

    almost_there Member

    No because IFoA and IAI sittings are a month apart. Everyone would prefer two exams a month apart rather than a day or two. It's about time people accepted the brilliant Judgment by Judge Brown.
     
  20. chenbod

    chenbod Member

    I would strongly advise against an internal complaint. The IFoA will use this to run down the clock to prevent you bringing a claim at the Employment Tribunal. You have 3 months less one day from the last act of discrimination to bring a claim. If anyone needs help lodging the claim, please get in touch
     
  21. Null

    Null Member

    I’ve made every effort to qualify. I’ve had enough. I’m not sure if the study hours are the same. But for the thousands of students that were disadvantaged by the changes, they’ll end up having more study hours since they have to repeat examinations. It’s not possible to just do a minimum of 125-150 one CT. You have to now do a minimum of 200-250. And if you fail, which you most likely will, you have to do it all over again which will increase study time. The IFOA and Acted no doubt profit from more expensive exam fees and you have to take 2 days off work and take 17 exams now. I’ll have to now do 18 exams since I’m required to reprove the competency which I’ve already demonstrated by repeating examinations. While there was a need to update the syllabus, there was no need to join these exams together and no need to lie to students about them not being disadvantaged.

    There is so much negative with regards to the IFOA in the judgment and ultimately they have been shown to discriminate, directly and indirectly. They’ve also been criticized for instructing to discriminate and that the discrimination is ongoing. Why don’t you focus on that and ask a question about why this has happened? Why have the IFoA not made a statement to say they are going to stop the discrimination which is ongoing? Why try to nit pick obscure points?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 24, 2019
    almost_there and chenbod like this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page