H Shearon v P Jagger T/a Stells Famous Pet Store: 6015890/2025

EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS

Case No 6015890/2025

Between

H ShearonClaimant

P Jagger T/a Stells Famous Pet StoreRespondent

Before

Judge Johnson

Not represented for respondent

Date 26 August 2025

JUDGMENT

(1) The claimant’s claim is successful, and the respondent shall pay the claimant the sum of £22,662.91 (Twenty-Two Thousand, Six Hundred and Sixty-Two Pounds 91 Pence only) in full and final settlement of the successful complaints of unfair dismissal, unlawful deduction from wages, breach of contract/notice pay and holiday pay and as discussed in the paragraphs below.

(2) This judgment is calculated on the following basis, applying relevant just and equitable principles under the Employment Rights Act 1996, as applied below: UNFAIR DISMISSAL (relating to unfair redundancy) A. Basic Award Subtotal/Total

[1]Completed years of service at date of effective termination = 16 years Weeks’ pay = £452.78 per week gross

[3]Claimant’s age at effective date of termination: 33 years, [therefore 1/2 week’s pay for first 5 years employment (2 ½ weeks in total), followed by 1 week’s pay for the remaining period for each completed year]

[4]Calculation for basic award is therefore: [£452.78 x {2 ½ + 11} = £6112.53 Subtotal (Basic Award) £6112.53 B. Compensatory Award 1. Immediate loss of earnings: 3 months’ pay = £5886.14 (gross) 2. Loss of statutory rights = £500.00 Subtotal (Compensatory Award) £6386.14 C. Notice Pay 1. 16+ years continuous service = 12 weeks’ notice. 2. Gross weekly pay = £452.78 3. Calculation for notice pay: (12 x £452.78) = £5433.36 Subtotal (Notice Pay) £5433.36 D. Holiday Pay 1. Claimant had 2 weeks accrued and untaken holiday entitlement at the date of termination of employment. 2. Holiday pay: 2 x £452.78 = £905.56 Subtotal (holiday pay) £905.56 E. Unlawful deduction from wages 1. The claimant was not paid for her final two weeks of her employment. 2. Claimant’s entitlement: (2 weeks x £452.78) = £905.56 Subtotal (wages) £905.56 F. Employer’s contribution to NEST pension 1. Employer contributed £10.66 each week. 2. Employer failed to make contributions for 2 years. 3. Claimant’s entitlement to lost contributions: (104 weeks x £10.66) = £1108.64 Subtotal £1108.64 G. Employer’s failure to provide a written statement of particulars 1. 4 weeks wages awarded: (4 x £452.78) = £1811.12 Subtotal £1811.12 Grand total £22,662.91 Recoupment of benefits The award is subject to the application of recoupment provisions in accordance with the Employment Protection (Recoupment of Jobseeker’s Allowance and Income Support) Regulations 1996 (SI 1996/2349). Prescribed element: (Immediate loss of earnings post dismissal): £5886.14 Prescribed period: (Date of termination on 15 January 2025 until date remedy determined on 26 August 2025). Total award: £22662.91 Balance: (Total award £22662.91- Prescribed element £5886.14) = £16,776.77

[1]This is my decision arising from the claimant’s claim which was presented to the Tribunal on 1 May 2025 following a period of early conciliation from 21 March to 15 April 2025. The claimant identified complaints of redundancy pay which appeared to arise from an alleged unfair dismissal, notice pay, unlawful deduction from wages and holiday pay.

[2]A Notice of claim was sent to the respondent business on 5 June 2025 informing them of today’s hearing date, enclosing a copy of the proceedings and requiring a response to be presented by 3 July 2025. The respondent failed to present the response at all and did not attend the hearing today.

[3]I checked the Tribunal file and noted that the proceedings had been served upon the respondent’s trading address and had not been returned by the Royal Mail. Companies House confirmed that Stells Pet Stores Limited had operated from the same location until 2010 when the company had dissolved, and it is understood that this was when the Stells family ceased operating the business and the respondent took over as a sole trader and unincorporated business.

[4]The claimant had taken advice from the Citizens Advice Bureau and produced a schedule of loss for use at the hearing today. It outlined the complaints being brought and the amounts sought. Unfortunately, the claimant had little by way of documentary evidence, and this was attributed to the absence of paperwork being produced by the respondent such as payslips, contracts of employment or pension details. Consequently, it was in the interests of justice to hear her oral evidence under oath in order that I could make the necessary and appropriate findings of facts on balance of probabilities. The respondent had not provided any evidence challenging the claimant’s complaint.

[5]The claimant worked as a retail assistant at the respondent pet shop in Colne. Initially, from the age 15 in 2006, she worked on Saturdays and Sundays while at college. She obtained her part 1 Veterinary Nurse qualification and began working full time from 6 July 2008, which she described as her formal date of commencement as an employee. She worked in this role until 15 January 2025 when she was made redundant. She had been aware that the business had been struggling for some time because bailiffs would turn up from time to time in respect of unpaid bills. She worked her final two weeks unpaid because the business had tropical fish that had to be removed and rehomed and she was the only person able to do this work.

[6]The claimant had not received a contract of employment at any stage by the respondent but had worked sufficiently long for the business to be entitled to 12 weeks’ notice.

[7]Her gross weekly pay was calculated at £452.78, and her net pay was £326. She was entitled to normal statutory annual leave entitlement.

[8]The employer paid £10.66 per week into a NEST pension in addition to any employee contribution.

[9]She had not received a written statement of particulars at any stage.

[10]Following her dismissal, she was unemployed for 3 months and received Universal Credit from the DWP during this period. She worked hard to mitigate her loss and found alternative work following this 3-month period in an industry which is significantly different to the respondent’s pet shop. She was conscious of the need to find paid alternative employment.

[11]The claimant was a convincing witness who gave credible and reliable evidence. It is unfortunate that the respondent failed to properly manage its duties towards her as an employee and did not engage in any consultation once it became clear that the business could not continue with her as an employee. There was no evidence of a fair redundancy process, and she was unfairly dismissed.

[12]I concluded that it was just and equitable to make the relevant award for unfair dismissal and the claimant was entitled to the other sums which she identified in her schedule of loss and supported with oral evidence during the hearing today.