Claimant v Business Solutions for Companies Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the claimant failed to establish on the balance of probabilities that he had two years' service as an employee with the respondent. The tribunal rejected the authenticity of the contract and payslips and noted the claimant failed to provide corroborating evidence such as bank statements, HMRC records, or P60s for the period 2021-2023 despite being warned this would be required. The claim was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
The tribunal did not accept that the claimant was entitled to a paid notice period of six months. The tribunal was not satisfied as to the authenticity and reliability of the contract of employment provided, which was electronically signed and could have been created and backdated recently. The claim was dismissed.
The tribunal found the claimant was at least a 'worker' from January 2024 based on bank statements and WhatsApp messages. The claimant was not paid for work done in August 2024, and there was evidence of regular monthly payments from January to July 2024. The tribunal awarded one month's salary under s13 Employment Rights Act 1996.
Facts
The claimant, an insolvency practitioner, claimed redundancy pay, notice pay and unpaid wages totaling £58,384.70 from his former employer. He was a director of the respondent company from February 2022 to June 2023 but held no shares. The respondent submitted a response but did not participate in proceedings and failed to comply with case management orders. The claimant provided a contract of employment and selective payslips but failed to provide bank statements for 2021-2023, P60s, or HMRC records despite being warned by Employment Judge Tobin that this evidence would be required to establish his employment status and length of service.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed the redundancy and notice pay claims, finding the claimant had not established two years' service as an employee or the authenticity of his contract. However, the tribunal found the claimant was at least a 'worker' from January 2024 based on bank statements and WhatsApp evidence, and awarded one month's unpaid wages (£7,333.33) for August 2024 under unlawful deduction from wages provisions.
Practical note
A claimant bears the burden of proving employment status and continuity of service through reliable contemporaneous documentary evidence, particularly where public funds may be involved; electronic contracts and selective payslips alone are insufficient without corroboration from independent third parties such as banks or HMRC.
Award breakdown
Award equivalent: 4.3 weeks' gross pay
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6019803/2024
- Decision date
- 8 September 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- professional services
- Represented
- No
Employment details
- Role
- Insolvency practitioner
- Salary band
- £80,000–£100,000
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No