DS Forums

 
 

Lord Sugar sues Stella for £35,000 in legal costs


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-06-2013, 20:12
boab34
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,387

http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/l...winner-1937148

Do you think he should be suing her or is he being nasty?
boab34 is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 07-06-2013, 20:38
TXF0429
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,018
http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/l...winner-1937148

Do you think he should be suing her or is he being nasty?
Sounds like a statement of intent to prevent other people from suing. Its not as if he needs the money.

I think he should leave her alone and they should just both get on with their lives.
TXF0429 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2013, 20:50
Jon Ross
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Somewhere extremely creepy
Posts: 3,088
She should have listened to Lord Sugar's famous advice

"Never underestimate me because you will be making a fatal error. I know everything. I've seen everything. I've done everything."
Jon Ross is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2013, 20:51
Iphigenia
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,935
It's a counter-suit, and, as her original claim was dismissed, I think he's entirely within his rights. it's not a question of "does he need the money" it's "don't mess with me".
Iphigenia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2013, 20:59
meglosmurmurs
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Titan Uranus
Posts: 31,966
Does this make Sugar part of the claim culture looking for an easy handout? lol
meglosmurmurs is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2013, 21:16
hyena
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,686
Quite right.

Why should he bear the cost of spurious law suits against him?
hyena is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2013, 21:21
Jo09
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,550
I understand that it was said that the claim should never have been brought. In that case Stella should expect to pay legal costs the same way you can be liable for the other teams legal costs if you lose a case.
Jo09 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2013, 21:45
redcherry
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 11,486
Its the principal. I don't blame Alan Sugar pursuing for costs
redcherry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2013, 21:56
apaul
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 9,699
He doesn't need the money. He should have risen above, but it shows his nature.
apaul is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2013, 22:01
bingbong
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,249
You have these tribunals so that bully-boy employers cant force large costs onto losing plaintiffs.
How many little guys will want to take on an employer in case they lose?
bingbong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2013, 22:09
george.millman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,587
Stella was the one who started this little game. I don't think Lord Sugar needs the money, but I believe that Stella's argument didn't stand up and shouldn't even have been brought. Lord Sugar may not need the money, but he was put to a lot of inconvenience and essentially slandered. I'm not at all surprised he wants her to pay up.
george.millman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2013, 22:16
Tracy_Klein
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 170
Well, he sued for damages, constructive dismissal is a serious accusation, newpapers talked about it. He was on his right to do it and I would have done the same thing.
Tracy_Klein is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2013, 00:04
Paace
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 12,487
Everyone seems to be blaming Stella. Has anyone heard her side of the story ? Remember Stella would only pursue her claim on the advice of a lawyer .
Has Stella given an interview anywhere ?

I never had much of an opinion of the gruff so and so, but he really has sunk to new depths with this lawsuit .

What a silly woman to give up an £85,000 job to 'work' for him .
Most of the candidates are daft to give up good jobs to go on this show and face the unnecessary abuse he dishes out .
Paace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2013, 00:21
wolvesdavid
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 6,880
Does this make Sugar part of the claim culture looking for an easy handout? lol
No! Lol.
wolvesdavid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2013, 00:28
george.millman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,587
Everyone seems to be blaming Stella. Has anyone heard her side of the story ? Remember Stella would only pursue her claim on the advice of a lawyer .
Has Stella given an interview anywhere ?

I never had much of an opinion of the gruff so and so, but he really has sunk to new depths with this lawsuit .

What a silly woman to give up an £85,000 job to 'work' for him .
Most of the candidates are daft to give up good jobs to go on this show and face the unnecessary abuse he dishes out .
There have been interviews with her. I have read her side of the story, and I still don't understand her point. I could see it if she was hardly being paid anything, but regardless of whether or not it was a job - and I believe it was, and I'll come to that in a moment - she was being paid a £100,000 salary! That is not to be coughed at. If she wasn't enjoying the work, she was at least being paid enough money to keep her very comfortable while she found a better job for herself.

Now, let's move onto the job itself. I think that Stella's problem was that she was completely overqualified. She was expecting to go into the company and be a high-flyer straight away, and that's not how it works. I'm surprised that Lord Sugar didn't spot that - he spotted it in Series 1 with Paul Torrisi, although Paul had said as much on his application, and Sugar told him that that wasn't what the job was about at all. The programme is called The Apprentice, and that is what the job was at the time. It has since changed to be a business partner job. Stella claims that Bordan Tkachuk told her that the job wasn't real. Bordan denies this so we'll never know if he said it or not, but it's worth knowing that none of the other five people who have got jobs have ever made any allegations like that - even Michelle, who left after a few months, has never said a word against Lord Sugar or his companies.
george.millman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2013, 00:36
tabithakitten
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,240
Everyone seems to be blaming Stella. Has anyone heard her side of the story ? Remember Stella would only pursue her claim on the advice of a lawyer .
Has Stella given an interview anywhere ?

I never had much of an opinion of the gruff so and so, but he really has sunk to new depths with this lawsuit .

What a silly woman to give up an £85,000 job to 'work' for him .
Most of the candidates are daft to give up good jobs to go on this show and face the unnecessary abuse he dishes out .
That's absolutely true. And as someone who knows several lawyers, I cannot believe someone wouldn't have advised her that her case was at best precarious and would likely have serious repercussions should she lose (which was quite possible).

Either she had a lawyer who overestimated their chances or she decided to risk things on a case that was at best 50/50 and would make her own business career turn tits up if she lost.

I'm not saying Stella didn't have a claim. However, she does appear to have taken one hell of a gamble and lost.
tabithakitten is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2013, 02:52
DavetheScot
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 16,500
There have been interviews with her. I have read her side of the story, and I still don't understand her point. I could see it if she was hardly being paid anything, but regardless of whether or not it was a job - and I believe it was, and I'll come to that in a moment - she was being paid a £100,000 salary! That is not to be coughed at. If she wasn't enjoying the work, she was at least being paid enough money to keep her very comfortable while she found a better job for herself.

Now, let's move onto the job itself. I think that Stella's problem was that she was completely overqualified. She was expecting to go into the company and be a high-flyer straight away, and that's not how it works. I'm surprised that Lord Sugar didn't spot that - he spotted it in Series 1 with Paul Torrisi, although Paul had said as much on his application, and Sugar told him that that wasn't what the job was about at all. The programme is called The Apprentice, and that is what the job was at the time. It has since changed to be a business partner job. Stella claims that Bordan Tkachuk told her that the job wasn't real. Bordan denies this so we'll never know if he said it or not, but it's worth knowing that none of the other five people who have got jobs have ever made any allegations like that - even Michelle, who left after a few months, has never said a word against Lord Sugar or his companies.
I'm rather inclined to believe Stella personally. I think it's revealing that after her series they changed to the "business partner" idea. Perhaps the earlier winners had been found fulfilling roles, but this time they didn't really have anything for her. She favourably impressed me on the show; I honestly can't see her bringing a case she knew to be baseless just as a money grab - she was earning good money before Apprentice and had no need to resort to such a thing.

None of us except those involved really know, of course. However, I don't give the tribunal verdict much credence as I think tribunals are likely to biased in favour of employers.
DavetheScot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2013, 08:00
tom ace
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 40
Hopefully however, if he wins, he'll give the winnings to charity
tom ace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2013, 11:54
brangdon
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 11,878
even Michelle, who left after a few months, has never said a word against Lord Sugar or his companies.
I should think most winners would be too canny to say it in public even if they thought it.

I'm rather inclined to believe Stella personally.
Me too. The job prize was always a weak part of the series. Which isn't to say she was right to sue.
brangdon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2013, 11:56
Damanda
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 33,270
http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/l...winner-1937148

Do you think he should be suing her or is he being nasty?
She was being nasty when she sued him. Always thought she was a wrong un.
All the positive spin about her making herself a success after her rough background, but she showed herself, not to be strong and determined but, as hard as nails and two faced.

He should counter sue or else her risks ten other seedy nitwits on that show having a go at suing him.
Damanda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2013, 11:58
Damanda
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 33,270
I'm rather inclined to believe Stella personally. I think it's revealing that after her series they changed to the "business partner" idea. Perhaps the earlier winners had been found fulfilling roles, but this time they didn't really have anything for her. She favourably impressed me on the show; I honestly can't see her bringing a case she knew to be baseless just as a money grab - she was earning good money before Apprentice and had no need to resort to such a thing.

None of us except those involved really know, of course. However, I don't give the tribunal verdict much credence as I think tribunals are likely to biased in favour of employers.
But they are not..... And all the evidence shows that , so the point on when you base the suppositions in your post are flawed.
Do you now accept she is likely to be being less than honest and had a reason to do it?
Damanda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2013, 12:00
Damanda
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 33,270
Everyone seems to be blaming Stella. Has anyone heard her side of the story ? Remember Stella would only pursue her claim on the advice of a lawyer .
On the advice of a lawyer? How do you know that? And do you suppose that no lawyer ever advices somebody who is being deceitful to take a shot?
Damanda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2013, 21:07
Tracy_Klein
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 170
She was being nasty when she sued him. Always thought she was a wrong un.
All the positive spin about her making herself a success after her rough background, but she showed herself, not to be strong and determined but, as hard as nails and two faced.

He should counter sue or else her risks ten other seedy nitwits on that show having a go at suing him.
Exactly! If I am not wrong, in his book The way I see it he tells the story of another of his employees suing him, I forgot the reasons though, I just know that when I heard for first time about Stella suing LS, I had a deja vu...
Tracy_Klein is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2013, 22:45
george.millman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,587
I should think most winners would be too canny to say it in public even if they thought it.
Yeah, but you'd think someone would have said something that implied it, even if they didn't say it outright. You'd think someone would have said something like, 'I respect Lord Sugar, but we have different styles and didn't see eye to eye on a lot of things' or something along those lines. As far as I know (correct me if I'm wrong), out of eleven winners, ten of them have never said anything about Sugar that is negative in any way.
george.millman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2013, 23:41
Paace
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 12,487
Yeah, but you'd think someone would have said something that implied it, even if they didn't say it outright. You'd think someone would have said something like, 'I respect Lord Sugar, but we have different styles and didn't see eye to eye on a lot of things' or something along those lines. As far as I know (correct me if I'm wrong), out of eleven winners, ten of them have never said anything about Sugar that is negative in any way.
From what I gather they never see him, maybe once or twice a year . They usually work under one of his managers .
Paace is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:08.