How to Draft a Rule 29 Amendment Application and Respond to a Wasted Costs Threat

Part 1: Drafting a Rule 29 Application to Amend Your Claim

Understanding the Context: Rule 29 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 allows you to ask the tribunal for permission to amend your claim (ET1). Once you have submitted your original ET1, you cannot change it without the tribunal’s permission . If you now wish to add new claims – for example, a claim of constructive unfair dismissal (because you resigned in response to your employer’s breach of contract) or post-resignation victimisation (because the employer retaliated against you after you resigned or filed your claim) – you will need to make a written Rule 29 application. The tribunal will carefully consider such requests, especially if they introduce new issues or come late in the process . Below are the steps and tips to draft an effective application:

• Use Proper Format and Heading: Write a formal letter or document addressed to the Tribunal. Include the case name and number, and title it clearly (e.g. “Application for Leave to Amend Claim – [Your Name] v [Respondent]”). In the opening, state that you are making an application under Rule 29 to amend your claim . For example, you might write: “In accordance with Rule 29 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013, I respectfully request permission to amend my claim.” Mention that you have attached a draft Amended ET1 showing the changes you propose . (It’s good practice to attach a copy of your original claim with the new wording highlighted or in track-changes, so the tribunal and respondent can easily see what you want to add.)
• Clearly Identify the Amendments Sought: Specify exactly what new claims or changes you wish to add. Be concise and direct. For example: “I seek to amend my claim to add a complaint of constructive unfair dismissal and a complaint of post-termination victimisation, arising from events after my resignation.” If you also need to adjust some facts or dates in your narrative to support these new claims, mention that as part of the amendment. The recent EAT guidance emphasises that the starting point is to identify the specific amendments clearly – the tribunal cannot assess your request unless it knows exactly what changes you propose . Providing a written draft of the amended claim (ideally as a single, integrated document) is almost always necessary .
• Explain Why the New Claims Were Not in the Original ET1: You must justify the late addition. The tribunal will want to know why these issues were not included from the outset . Common reasons might be: you only became aware of new facts or evidence later; you were not aware of your legal right to bring these claims until after getting advice; or the victimisation occurred after you filed the original claim. For example, you could write: “These claims were not included in my original ET1 because they arise from events that occurred after I submitted my claim, namely [describe the post-resignation acts], and I did not have knowledge or evidence of certain facts earlier.” If a recent conversation with a legal adviser made you realise you have a constructive dismissal claim, say so. Be honest and specific in your explanation. (The template language might be: “This claim was not included in the original ET1 because I only recently [discovered X] or I was only recently advised that I could claim Y.” .)
• Outline the Facts Supporting the New Claims: In your application, summarise the key facts that form the basis of the new claims. If the facts were already described in your original claim, highlight that point. For example: “The factual allegations underlying the constructive dismissal claim (in particular, the Respondent’s failure to address my grievances and the final incident on [date]) were already set out in my ET1; I am now seeking to add a legal claim based on those same facts.” Emphasising that the new claim is essentially a “re-labelling” of facts already in the claim can greatly help your application . Tribunals distinguish between amendments that add a new legal label to existing facts and those that introduce entirely new factual allegations A new label (for example, characterising an unfair dismissal as also discrimination, or vice versa) is usually easier to allow than a wholly new issue that would require fresh evidence . For the post-resignation victimisation claim, briefly describe what happened (e.g. “Two weeks after my resignation, I learned that the Respondent gave me an unfavourable reference and threatened legal action against me for filing this claim, which I believe is an act of victimisation because I had asserted my rights under the Equality Act”). Keep the factual summary focused and relevant to the new causes of action.
• Address Time Limit Issues Head-on: One of the most crucial parts of your application is to deal with any limitation (time limit) problems. New claims must generally be presented within the normal time limits – 3 months from the dismissal for an unfair dismissal claim, and 3 months from the act of discrimination/victimisation for Equality Act claims – subject to extensions in certain circumstances. If your resignation (for the constructive dismissal) or the post-termination incidents happened a while ago, the respondent might argue your new claims are “out of time.” You should pre-empt this by explaining why the tribunal should still allow the claims.
• Invoke the Overriding Objective – Emphasise Fairness: In your application, after laying out the what and why, argue that allowing the amendments would serve the interests of justice. The tribunal’s overriding objective is to deal with cases fairly and justly. You can write something like: “The purpose of this amendment is to ensure all relevant issues between the parties are before the Tribunal. I believe that allowing the amendment will assist the Tribunal in dealing with the proceedings efficiently and fairly, in line with the overriding objective.” Point out that you are not acting in bad faith – rather, you seek to clarify the issues. If the case is still at a relatively early stage (for example, final hearing not yet listed or many months away), mention that the respondent will not be seriously prejudiced because they will have ample time to prepare a response to the new claims . You might say: “The claim is at an early stage and no hearing date has been set, so the Respondent will have a full opportunity to answer the new allegations and no unfair disadvantage will be caused.” On the other hand, explain the prejudice to you if the amendment is refused – for instance, you would be deprived of the chance to pursue legitimate grievances that are closely related to your case . The tribunal will perform a balancing exercise of the injustice or hardship to each side if the amendment is allowed or refused . Your goal is to show that balance favors allowing the amendment .
• Conclude and Comply with Procedure: Conclude your letter politely, perhaps with a line like: “For the above reasons, I respectfully request that the Tribunal grant permission to amend my claim as set out.” Before signing off (“Yours faithfully”), add a note that you are sending a copy of this application to the Respondent (or their solicitor) in accordance with the Tribunal rules. (Indeed, Rule 30(2) of the 2013 Rules requires you to copy any written application to the other party .) Make sure you actually send a copy to the Respondent at the same time as to the Tribunal. Keep proof of doing so (e.g. email delivery receipt or certificate of posting).

Finally, be aware that after you submit your application, the Tribunal will invite the Respondent to comment or object (if they haven’t already). If the amendment is significant and the Respondent objects, the Tribunal may schedule a short Preliminary Hearing to decide whether to allow the amendment . This is normal – at that hearing, you’ll need to verbally address the same points: why you didn’t include the claims earlier, why justice requires they be included now, and how the Respondent won’t be unfairly hurt by the change . Sometimes the Tribunal may decide on the papers if it’s straightforward, but be prepared to elaborate your case if asked. If you’ve already clearly made the points above in writing, you’ll be in a good position.

Common Mistakes to Avoid (Amendment Applications):

• Procrastinating: Don’t delay your application without good reason. The later you apply, the harder it is to convince the tribunal. An application made on the eve of final hearing, for example, faces an uphill battle . Apply as soon as you realise new claims are needed.
• Being Vague: Failing to specify exactly what amendments you seek is a mistake. Always identify the new claims or changes precisely . Never say just “I want to add some facts” without detailing them – the tribunal needs clarity.
• Lacking Explanation: Simply asking to add a claim “because I want to” will not suffice. You must explain why it wasn’t in the original claim and provide a credible reason for the omission .
• Ignoring Time Limits: Avoid statements like “I assume the tribunal will sort out any time issues.” It is your responsibility to address limitation. Demonstrating awareness of the legal time limits (ERA s.111 and EqA s.123) and arguing for an extension if needed shows you are acting reasonably, not carelessly.
• Overlooking Prejudice: Don’t focus only on your needs; address the potential impact on the other side. If, for example, the new claim would require the respondent to gather new evidence or if it comes late, acknowledge that and, if relevant, offer to cooperate with any adjusted timetable. Showing that you’ve considered the respondent’s position (and still find that fairness favors allowing the amendment) makes your application more persuasive .
• Inappropriate Tone: Keep your tone formal, polite, and focused on facts and reasons. Do not use accusatory or emotional language. The application is essentially a request to the judge – it should read like a well-reasoned proposal, not a rant against the employer.

By following the above steps and tips, you will have a well-structured Rule 29 application that covers all the bases: it identifies the new claims, provides reasons and context, addresses procedural and timing issues, and appeals to the tribunal’s sense of fairness. This thorough approach maximises your chances that the tribunal will allow you to amend your claim and bring in those constructive dismissal and victimisation complaints.

Part 2: Drafting a Response Letter to a Wasted Costs Threat

Understanding the Context: You have received a letter from the Respondent (Thames Valley Police) threatening to pursue a wasted costs application against you. In Employment Tribunal cases, such letters are commonly known as “costs warning letters.” They are often meant to intimidate claimants into withdrawing or backing down . It is important not to panic. Employment Tribunals are generally no-cost jurisdictions – unlike the civil courts, each side usually bears its own legal costs win or lose . Costs orders in tribunals are rare and only made in exceptional circumstances, such as when a party has behaved vexatiously or unreasonably or a claim has no reasonable prospect of success . In fact, statistically, very few cases (only a tiny percentage) result in claimants having to pay the other side’s costs. A costs threat is a tactic; however, you should still answer it calmly and firmly to show that you will not be easily spooked and that you understand the law. Here’s how to draft your response:

1. Keep a Calm and Professional Tone: Your overriding goal in this letter is to diffuse the situation and protect your position without escalating the hostility. The tone should be polite, firm, and confident. Do not respond in anger or use inflammatory language – that could later be shown to the tribunal to cast you in a bad light. Remember, this letter itself may end up as evidence if the dispute over costs goes further, so write it with an eye on the judge reading it. Use a neutral greeting (e.g., “Dear [Name of Respondent’s Solicitor]”), reference their letter (“Thank you for your letter dated [date]”), and maintain a courteous tone throughout. Even if their letter was aggressive or threatening, your reply should remain measured. This shows you are behaving reasonably, which is the image you want to project.
2. Format and Structure Your Reply Like a Formal Letter: Just as with any professional correspondence, include the date, the case reference (if known), and a clear subject line (for example: “Response to your costs warning letter dated [date]”). In the first paragraph, acknowledge receipt of their letter and state that you have considered its contents. Example opening: “I write in response to your letter of [date] in which you indicated your intention to seek a wasted costs order against me.” Acknowledge the seriousness of their threat without sounding overly intimidated. You might add: “I take any threat of costs seriously. I have reflected carefully on the points you raised.” This shows you are not dismissing it out of hand. Then, preview your position calmly: “However, I must respectfully disagree with your assertions and I will address each of them in turn.”
3. State Your Position on the Costs Threat Clearly and Respectfully: In the next part of the letter, refute the basis of their costs threat, using factual assertions and legal context. It often helps to recall the legal threshold for costs orders in the tribunal. You can mention (correctly) that costs orders are exceptional. For instance: “As you will be aware, the Employment Tribunal rarely awards costs except in limited circumstances. Rule 76 of the Employment Tribunal Rules (2013) provides that a costs order may be made only if a party or their representative has acted vexatiously, abusively, or unreasonably in the proceedings, or if a claim had no reasonable prospect of success . A wasted costs order (which under Rule 80 may be made against a representative for improper conduct ) is equally exceptional.” By citing the rule (or at least paraphrasing it in plain English) you show that you know the legal test for costs. In plain terms, it means a tribunal will not order costs against you unless your behaviour in the case has been egregiously unreasonable or your claim is utterly hopeless. You can then assert that this is not the case here: “I do not believe that my conduct of this case meets that threshold. I have complied with tribunal orders and engaged with the process appropriately, and I firmly believe my claims have merit. Therefore, I cannot agree that a costs application against me would be well-founded.” Keep the tone non-accusatory – you’re not attacking them for raising it, you’re simply stating that you have done nothing improper to justify such an order.
4. Address the Specific Allegations or Grounds for Unreasonableness: In their letter, the respondent probably cited reasons they believe your conduct is unreasonable – for example, that by seeking to amend your claim now (to add constructive dismissal and victimisation) you are “pursuing a hopeless claim” or “causing the respondent to incur unnecessary expense”. It’s crucial to respond to these points one by one in a factual manner. Structure this as separate short paragraphs or bullet points, if that makes it clearer. For example:
5. Reinforce the Rarity of Costs Orders (Without Sounding Complacent): It can be effective to remind the respondent that costs are not the norm in Employment Tribunal cases. You might cite a bit of data or case law: “As you will know, costs orders in the Employment Tribunal are extremely rare (well under 1% of cases) , and for good reason – employees should not be deterred from bringing claims by the fear of costs, unless they act improperly. I am aware of this, and I am conducting my case in a responsible manner.” This gently undercuts the threat by putting it in perspective. However, be careful not to come across as dismissive of the tribunal’s power – you still take the threat seriously, but you’re pointing out it’s not likely to succeed under the circumstances. You could add: “Naturally, I hope we can avoid any application for costs, as it would only increase the time and expense for everyone.” This shows you’re not eager for an ancillary fight.
6. Conclude with a Firm but Cordial Closing: After addressing their points, close your letter in a way that maintains professionalism and possibly leaves the door open for de-escalation. For example: “In light of the above, I respectfully invite you to reconsider whether a costs application is truly appropriate in this case. I intend to continue with my claim (including the proposed amendments) and am confident it has reasonable prospects. However, I remain open to sensible discussion of the issues at hand. I trust that we can focus our efforts on the substantive merits of the case going forward, rather than satellite issues of costs.” This kind of ending does a few things: (a) it makes clear you’re not backing down, (b) it indicates you’re reasonable and would prefer to concentrate on resolving the real dispute, and (c) it subtly suggests that their threat may be counter-productive. Finally, sign off with the usual courteous closing (“Yours sincerely,”) and your name. If you’re emailing, your typed name is fine; if it’s a printed letter, sign it by hand as well.

Additional Tips:

• Stick to the Facts and Law: In rebutting their arguments, use objective language. Instead of “your threat is baseless and outrageous,” say “I do not accept that my conduct has been in any way improper or unreasonable.” Ground your statements in the law (as demonstrated above, referencing the Rules and statutes). This shows you are responding on a legal footing rather than an emotional one.
• Length and Clarity: There’s no strict requirement on length, but a 1-2 page letter is usually sufficient. You want it to be long enough to cover your points, but not so long that the key messages get lost. Use short paragraphs or bullet points for each argument so that it’s easy to read quickly. The opposing solicitor (and possibly a judge later) will appreciate a well-organised response.
• Tone Check: After drafting, re-read your letter from the perspective of a neutral observer. Ensure the tone never slips into sarcasm, anger, or personal attacks. For example, avoid sentences like “it is laughable that you would even suggest X” – even if you feel that way, it must remain unsaid. A neutral, assertive tone earns you respect. You can be assertive (“I disagree with your assessment and here’s why…”) without being aggressive.
• No Admissions or New Information Unnecessarily: Be cautious not to inadvertently concede something that could later be used against you. For instance, don’t say “perhaps my case is weak, but…” or “I’m sorry for the inconvenience.” Such statements can be misconstrued as admissions. You can remain courteous without apologizing for pursuing your case. Also, this letter is not the place to introduce new allegations or rehash the entire case facts – stick to the issue of costs and your amendment.
• Preserve a Copy: This is more about practice than drafting, but ensure you keep a copy of this letter and proof of sending (email sent items or postal receipt). If the dispute escalates, you might need to show the tribunal this exact correspondence.

Common Mistakes to Avoid (Costs Threat Responses):

• Reacting in Anger or Fear: It’s natural to feel upset by a costs threat, but do not write the letter in a fit of anger or panic. Avoid insults, exclamation marks, or any ranting. Also, don’t let fear make you too apologetic. If you sound cowed, it might embolden the other side. Aim for a balanced tone – confident yet polite.
• Ignoring the Letter: While you are not obliged to respond to a costs warning, completely ignoring a serious costs threat isn’t wise if you plan to continue your claim . It could leave the impression that you either didn’t understand the letter or you didn’t care. A short, reasoned response is usually better than silence (and you’ve decided to respond, which is why you’re drafting this).
• Threatening Back: Two wrongs don’t make a right. Do not respond by counter-threatening to seek costs against the respondent (unless there is a genuinely good reason to, but even then that would usually be done via the tribunal, not an angry letter). If you retaliate with threats, you risk escalating a tit-for-tat exchange that could make settlement or conciliation harder. It’s fine to stand your ground and even to point out if their conduct is bordering on oppressive, but do so in a measured way. For example, instead of “I’ll make sure the tribunal sees how you’re bullying me,” you could say, “I am concerned by the tone of your letter. I hope we can avoid unnecessary disputes about costs so as not to distract from the main case.”
• Forgetting to Address Key Points: Make sure you answer their main allegations. If their letter said, for example, “your claim of victimisation is out of time and has no reasonable prospect,” do respond to that directly (as shown above). Don’t sidestep it with generic statements. If you don’t rebut a specific point, they might later argue you had no answer to it.
• Over-arguing the Merits of the Case: While you should assert that you believe in your claim, don’t use this letter to fully argue your unfair dismissal or discrimination case. That’s for the tribunal hearing. It’s enough here to say “I maintain the claim is well-founded” without diving into all the evidence. Oversharing your legal strategy or evidence at this stage isn’t necessary and could even give the other side a preview of your arguments. Stay focused on the costs issue.
• Inflaming the Dispute: The objective of your response is partly to defuse. If your letter is too combative, it may backfire and entrench the other side’s position. Sometimes a reasonable response can actually discourage the employer from pursuing a costs application, because they see you are not an easy target and you know the law. Thus, avoid any needlessly provocative language. You can be firm (“I will robustly oppose any application for costs, as I am confident I have acted reasonably.”) without being provocative (“Your costs threat is absurd and I’ll seek sanctions against you for even raising it.”).

By following these guidelines, your response letter will convey that you are a rational and informed litigant. You show respect for the tribunal’s processes while standing up for yourself. This kind of letter not only addresses the immediate threat but also positions you favourably in front of the tribunal – demonstrating that you are focused on the real issues and not engaging in side skirmishes without cause.

Conclusion: In summary, as a litigant in person, you can effectively manage both the task of amending your claim and responding to a costs threat by being organised, factual, and courteous. For the Rule 29 amendment application, detail what you want to add, explain why it’s just and fair to allow it (covering timing and new claims of constructive dismissal and victimisation with reference to time limits), and present your request in a structured, professional manner. For the costs threat response, remain calm and methodically counter the allegations, citing the high threshold for costs (Rule 76/79) and the tribunal’s discretion under s.111 ERA and s.123 EqA for your new claims . Throughout both documents, the key is to show the tribunal that you are acting reasonably and in good faith. By doing so, you not only improve your chances of success on the applications at hand but also enhance your credibility in the eyes of the tribunal for the overall case. Good drafting is as much about how you say things as what you say – so use the guidance above to strike the right tone and include the necessary content. Good luck with your proceedings, and remain confident that a well-prepared litigant in person can navigate these procedures effectively.

Disclaimer

The content of this article is for general information only and does not constitute legal advice. No solicitor-client relationship is created, and we accept no liability for any loss arising from reliance on these materials. Always seek independent, qualified advice on your own circumstances.