21 years' service nearly lost to strike-out error: a cautionary tale about tribunal correspondence

A near miss for a long-serving employee

This case shows how administrative errors can derail employment claims, even for employees with decades of service. The claimant, who had worked for Currys plc for over 21 years, had her unfair dismissal and redundancy payment claims struck out because the tribunal mistakenly believed she had less than two years' service. The strike-out warnings were sent to her, but she did not receive them — possibly because they went into a junk email folder that automatically emptied after 10 days.

The importance of responding to tribunal letters

The claimant only discovered the strike-outs months later when she checked her case online. She promptly applied for reconsideration, explaining that she had not received the correspondence and that her claim form clearly showed she started work in 2000. The tribunal accepted her explanation and revoked the strike-outs, reinstating her claims. This was a fortunate outcome, as the time limit for applying for reconsideration is only 14 days.

Why the unfair dismissal claim failed

Despite having her claims reinstated, the claimant ultimately lost her unfair dismissal case. The tribunal found that the dismissal was not unfair on its merits. While the judgment does not provide detailed reasons, it serves as a reminder that even long-serving employees must prove that their dismissal was procedurally or substantively unfair.

What this means for similar claims

This case underscores two key points: first, always ensure you respond to tribunal correspondence, even if you think it is a mistake. Second, having sufficient service is just the first hurdle — you still need to show that the dismissal was unfair. If you are bringing an unfair dismissal claim, be prepared to present evidence on the reasonableness of the employer's actions.