Claimant v Homecare Perfection Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the claimant resigned immediately after being invited to an investigatory meeting concerning alleged breaches of confidentiality. The tribunal concluded there was no repudiatory breach by the respondent, and the invitation to the meeting was entirely within contractual terms. The claimant failed to discharge the evidential burden to establish the respondent acted without reasonable and proper cause. The tribunal concluded the claimant resigned to avoid the investigation meeting, not in response to any breach of contract.
The respondent deducted £300 from the claimant's wages for predicted overtime costs to cover 50 hours of shifts the claimant failed to work when leaving without notice. The tribunal found this deduction was authorised by a term in the claimant's contract under Section 13(2)(a) ERA 1996. Although the respondent did not explain the deduction well beforehand, this did not make the deduction unauthorised. The claimant did not challenge that the costs were actually incurred.
Facts
The claimant was a care worker who resigned with immediate effect on 19 March 2025, immediately after being invited to an investigatory meeting concerning alleged breaches of confidentiality. The allegations arose from a recording of a phone call made by an ex-employee (not the respondent) which was sent to the claimant's manager. At the hearing, the claimant claimed she resigned due to bullying, being overworked, pressure to work with children, data sharing issues, and the recording incident. However, none of these matters except the recording were mentioned in her resignation email or original claim form. The claimant had completed wellbeing meetings, supervision meetings and a staff survey a week before resignation without raising any concerns.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed both claims. On constructive dismissal, the judge found the claimant had not discharged her evidential burden to establish any repudiatory breach by the respondent. The invitation to an investigatory meeting was entirely within contractual terms and the respondent had reasonable and proper cause to investigate. The tribunal concluded the claimant resigned to avoid the investigation, not in response to any breach. On unlawful deductions, the £300 deduction for covering shifts was authorised by a contractual term, despite inadequate explanation beforehand.
Practical note
A claimant who raises multiple reasons for resignation at hearing, none of which were documented at the time of resignation or in contemporaneous records, will struggle to establish constructive dismissal, particularly where the resignation immediately follows a lawful disciplinary invitation.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6017469/2025
- Decision date
- 18 July 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- healthcare
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep
Employment details
- Role
- Care Worker
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep