Dude, where’s my car? Transport shenanigans in Twizel

A South Canterbury hospitality business owner is defending a personal grievance claim against a former employee.  The parties were unable to agree to a settlement in mediation, so the matter progressed to an investigation meeting before a Member of the Employment Relations Authority (similar to the UK Employment Tribunal).  It took place in the conference room of a Twizel hotel.

As grievances go, this one is unremarkable except for a strange event that occurred outside the venue. 

Because the matter is before the Authority, the parties, their representatives, and out of an abundance of caution around the sub judice rule, the Authority Member have not been identified here.  We will only report that the employer’s lawyer had driven there from Christchurch, and the employee’s advocate, being from Auckland, appeared by video link.  

There were witnesses, including the daughter of the employee. 

The hospitality business that was defending the claim has two directors appointed in 2016, who are husband and wife, and both were witnesses.  In the afternoon, the husband said he needed to pick up his wife (who he couldn’t reach by phone) and bring her to the investigation meeting because it was her turn to give evidence.  But for whatever reason, at that particular time he didn’t have a car to pick her up with.

Lawyer to the rescue

The employer’s lawyer kindly handed the husband the keys to her car so that he could pick up his wife, and she could attend the investigation meeting.

Sounds simple enough, but…

The husband left, and eventually returned, but in the wrong car!

The employee has a car with keyless entry.  She told me she was in the habit of leaving the car unlocked with the key in the centre console “because this is Twizel”, unless she was parking in a larger town.  The husband knew this from when he had employed her, and had driven her car previously, including loading it with items relevant to the employee’s job when she was required to travel between multiple sites operated by the employer.

The employee was frazzled, as people often are at investigation meetings, and didn’t notice that her car had disappeared briefly.   But her daughter did – she saw its return through the window of the conference room and the husband walking towards the entrance.  When returned it was parked in a different place, and the employee later had a brief struggle with the steering wheel lock because of the way it was parked.

The wife arrived too, but in a different car, bless her.

Employer’s response

I reached out to the employer’s Christchurch-based lawyer whose response indicated that she believed that a Police complaint had been made and for that reason “it is inappropriate to publish this piece”, and would not comment further.  However, the employee decided against making that complaint.

Odd behaviour

Why would a company director who had already been lent his lawyer’s car, walk past it and “borrow” the car of a former employee with whom he was embroiled in litigation, without permission, and make no attempt to hide it?  That’s a bit strange, isn’t it?

Tristam Price

Editor