Moulton car dealership awarded £38,000 by employment tribunal

A car dealership manager has been awarded £38,000 after reportedly being fired from his job without cause.

Andrew Tunnicliff was dismissed by text in March 2022 from Baytree Car Sales on High Road, Moulton.

The company alleged this was for gross misconduct - but an employment tribunal found that the documents they provided were likely fabricated.

The company disputes this and say they are considering an appeal.

Mr Tunnicliff (38) had been employed at the Moulton business since he was a teenager and had worked his way up to the role of manager.

An employment tribunal in Lincoln heard claims from the company that Mr Tunnicliff was dismissed for gross misconduct following an investigation.

However, Mr Tunnicliff says he never had a single meeting or discussion about this.

Employment Judge Hutchinson came to the conclusion that notes and letters about the investigation had been made up.

In a report of the outcome of the November tribunal which was published on Friday, he writes: “I am satisfied that document was created for the purposes of this tribunal.”

One claim was that Mr Tunnicliff signed cheques on behalf of the former owner who had passed away, however the tribunal heard that this had never been an issue before.

The judge believed the firing was triggered by an argument in March between Mr Tunnicliff and one of the owners, which escalated.

That night, the owner texted him: “Hand keys in tomoz, u no longer work for us or my family”.

Mr Tunnicliff says he did not receive any pay for February or March, a letter of dismissal or a P45.

As he had has only ever worked at the company and doesn’t have any qualifications, he has found it difficult to get new work.

He was awarded unpaid wages of £3,894, 12 weeks’ notice pay of £7,123, and other compensation £27,262.

A representative for the company says: “Baytree Car Sales disputes that Mr Tunnicliff was wrongly dismissed or that paperwork was forged for the tribunal.

“One of the directors was unable to attend the tribunal due to other commitments, and he could have provided explanations which would have proved this.”