if you were an prospective employer - what would you think of this reason for being sacked from your previous job.............

[FAQtothefuture]

"I hadn't transferred my TV Licence to my new address"

(4 days after moving into the house and they were away on business with work for 2 1/2 days of that) should add a "must" for the job they were sacked from was owning a TV licence if they had a TV.......

Yes, it is 3 months less one day to go to an ET so if he was dismissed from 27 February he has until 26 March to submit the application. If he can't get help from a union then the CAB will be able to help him fill out the forms.

If he wins he will get a week's pay for every full year he has worked there plus any ongoing loss of earnings, any pension loss and usually an extra couple of weeks' money to reflect the fact that he will have lost any employment protection (ie in any new job he would not be able to claim unfair dismissal until he has worked there a year). It would also mean he would get JSA, so well worth it even if it is a bit of hassle. I think he may also be able to claim expenses for going to the ET hearing, I will check and post again.

Whether it is unfair dismissal will depend upon what their own rules say about having a TV licence and whether staff knew about the rules, so he needs to dig out all that information (or ask the employer for it). Hope that is some help, what a horrible situation.

southern - what if his letter from the appeal meeting says his employment ended on the 27th February (I'm pretty sure that's what he told me last week)......would they take the date from the initial letter or the 2nd one??

Their own rules say he had to have a TV licence, there was nothing in it (he dug out his contact etc before the appeal meeting) about not having transferred a valid licence to a new address. The letter he receieved after his appeal meeting quite clearly stated that it was because someone else had been paying it (ie me).

For some bizarre reason they couldn't get their head around the fact that we kept separate accounts, even while still living together, and split the bills according to the amount of money going into each account - regardless of whose name the bill was in. Apparently because I was paying it it must have been my licence, and the fact that his name was on it must have been an error when it was issued .

Well, it seems to me that if the final letter says 27 Feb you have until 26 May (not March, sorry, I struggle with adding 3 months on to a date, clearly) to make the claim but of course you don't have to wait until the last day so in his position I would make the claim as soon as possible while it is all fresh in his mind.

Re the expenses, this is the leaflet although I see it is a bit out of date so may be worth asking the ET he applies to for their up to date info.

www.employmenttribunals.gov.uk/Documents/Publications/ExpensesAllowances.pdf.

FWIW I can't imagine that the dismissal can be fair unless the rules say that he has to pay the licence and it has to be in his name. I presume that if you have been living separately you have 2 licences though (1 for each address). It must be common for couples to split bills so that one pays eg the electicity and gas, one pays the mortgage etc. He does need to look at exactly what the internal rules say though as well as thinking about what steps if any the employer took to draw those to the attention of staff (and periodically to remind them) as even if he broke the rules he may still have a claim if he can show that he could not reasonably have known about them.

thanks for that

No the rules don't say that he has to pay the licence - simply that he had to have one. which he did (and always has done). It was in his name and in the working out of who paid what it ended up going out of my account.

I was still living at the address is was registered at until the end of January - he had been in shared accomodation so hadn't needed one so just left it with me until the time came for him to need one.

I've since got my own (as I've moved) and he's now taken over the paying of his licence again.

So they dismissed him for not having one at the right address and then changed it on appeal to the fact that he wasn't paying it? Seems to me that you stand a good chance but get him to check all the rules really carefully to make sure there is nothing tucked away. He can then refer to the actual section(s) when he submits the ET. It may end up in him still being out of work but hopefully they will pay some more money rather than defend the decision.

One other thought - are there redundancies going on or likely? Could they have used this as a reason to avoid paying redundancy? If so that may increase his compensation a bit further as he might have been entitled to extra notice etc.

no redudancies going on - he was in the middle of a big project with them and with the credit crunch I should imagine they'll be employing more people to cope with the larger numbers of people who will inevitably default on their TV licence paments.

Thanks for your help

I am coming in belatedly but must add my point. I would suggest if at all possible trying to negoiate a resignation rather than dismissal. I resigned from my job rather than be dismissed. I am very glad of this now because very many firms ask as matter of course whether you have ever been dimissed for whatever reason. HR officers are incredibly conservative. SO sorry, and good luck.

well he had some good news on Friday - he got paid. Which is good as he can actuall pay his bills and eat this month.

However, I think now he's been paid (and they told him at his appeal that the didn't usually so he sorted of negotiated that with them I guess......) I have a suspicion it's going to be nigh on impossible to get him to take it to an ET now .

He's more stubborn than I am........

FAQ - Good luck - I hope you are able to pursue this further.