Case 2603872/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss. J Dodds v LCS Mortgages Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2603872/2020
- Decision date
- 26 February 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Heap
- Venue
- Via Cloud Video Platform
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss. J Dodds
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Heap sat alone at a remote hearing on 24 February 2021. The tribunal found that Miss J Dodds' claim of constructive unfair dismissal was well founded and ordered the respondent, LCS Mortgages Limited, to pay a basic award of £1,118.34.
The tribunal also found that the complaint for unpaid notice pay succeeded and ordered payment of £745.56. The claim for unpaid holiday succeeded in part only, the tribunal finding that the claimant was entitled to a further two days' accrued holiday pay and ordering payment of £99.00, less any tax and national insurance due on that amount.
The claim for a redundancy payment failed and was dismissed. No separate compensatory award, interest award, or discrimination remedy was recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | The claim was described as constructive unfair dismissal and was found well founded; the tribunal ordered a basic award of £1,118.34. | Upheld | — | £1,118 |
| Breach of contract | Complaint for unpaid notice pay succeeded. | Upheld | — | £746 |
| Holiday pay | Succeeded in part to the extent of two days' accrued holiday pay; the award was £99.00 less any tax and national insurance due. | Upheld | — | £99 |
| Redundancy | Claim for a redundancy payment failed and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,963
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £1,118
- statutory, unfair dismissal
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.