Menu

Market Harborough: Second anniversary of Lawson West’s merger with Brown & Co Solicitors

The office at Millers House, Roman Way, has recently re-open for business during Coronavirus and the team is pleased to offer pre-booked appointments.Incorporating Logo

Lawson West Solicitors incorporating Brown & Co

The merged firm, trading in Market Harborough as Lawson West Solicitors incorporating Brown & Co, prides itself on its commitment and depth of knowledge to provide quality legal services and lasting client relationships to individuals and business owners.

Market Harborough Solicitors

The team in Market Harborough has grown in numbers over recent years and currently there are fifteen employees who work out of the office. Lawson West provides a broad range of personal and commercial legal services including probate and wills, conveyancing, family, employment, dispute resolution, commercial contracts and commercial property, advising on many areas of law including redundancy and moving house, to selling your business.

Ashley HuntElizabeth Brown

Ashley Hunt, Director of Lawson West Solicitors says:

“At Lawson West Market Harborough, we continue to build on the strength of our local relationships with clients and contacts and deliver exceptional client service. Market Harborough office is an important location within our Leicestershire offering and I’m extremely pleased with our continued growth and focus. I’d like to thank Elizabeth Brown and others, who transferred to Lawson West in 2018 and who continue to provide a deep level of dedication and commitment to our clients, and the talented lawyers and staff who work in Roman Way.”

 

Click image below to find out more…

Market Harborough Office Roman Way

Case Study – Employment: Claire’s Story about Redundancy and Unfair Dismissal

Claire’s Story

“Claire’s unfair treatment as a result of unfair selection resulting in redundancy”


Situation:  
          A woman employee is dismissed as a result of being selected for redundancy, after the selection matrix has been unfairly and wrongly applied.

Type of law:       Employment – Unfair Dismissal

Lawyer:                Lawson West Solicitors – Employment Team 

 

Claire worked as an accountant for a medium size accountancy firm in the West Midlands for 9 years. She was responsible for a number of junior staff and had a good relationship with her co-workers. Claire had 3 other co-workers who were in a similar role to herself and carried out a similar amount of responsibility.

Claire had progressed well through the company over previous years but her situation changed when a new Partner joined the firm approximately 2 years ago who was in charge of Claire’s department. Claire found that she was often ostracised from events and projects and often Claire would find that the Partner would go directly to Claire’s staff so that she felt left out. Nevertheless, Claire was determined to make the best of it in the hope that she too would one day be offered partnership. 

Whilst it was Claire’s view that the firm was operating well and remained efficient, she received a letter notifying her that due to a restructure her role was a at risk of redundancy. Her 3 other peers who carried out the similar role, were invited to a consultation meeting whereby they were fully appraised of the restructure and its reason. 

Claire and her co-workers went to a second meeting (first for Claire) and were told that there would be certain criteria and a matrix upon which they would be scored so that the person with the lowest score would be made redundant. She was told that the scores would be based on attendance and disciplinary records.

Claire believed that she should have scored well since she had limited absence and no disciplinary issues since working for firm. However, Claire was aware that the person assessing her ability was the new Partner. Claire couldn’t help but feel that this was an opportunity for the new Partner to exit her from the business.

Subsequently, the scoring took place and Claire was selected for redundancy given that she had the lowest score. When Claire reviewed the scores it was clear that they were incorrect and unfair. The matrix contained sections on ability that had not been present previously when the matrix was defined. Claire noted that she only scored 1, the lowest you could obtain. Claire was the most experienced, most skilled and most qualified. Claire would often work additional hours and taken on additional work far greater than her peers, yet she only scored one. The next person above her scored one more point yet they had disciplinary issues and relatively poor attendance, lacked the same knowledge and had no qualifications.

Whilst the firm did consult with Claire, when she raised the fact that she had scored almost no marks for ability she was told that her Partner has assessed her as this based on his understanding and feeling of her ability. 

What could Claire do?

Claire began by searching the internet for advice and she came across Lawson West Solicitors.   

She met with our expert employment lawyers where it was explained that there were several avenues to explore. Initially, Lawson West’s employment lawyer’s advised her to raise an appeal against the decision to make her redundant and set out clearly why the decision to select her for redundancy was unfair, most notably because the firm had not used objective and measurable criteria in assessing Claire’s scores for the matrix. Instead it had relied on one person’s subjective view without regard to any appraisals, alternative peer reviews, or measurements against Claire’s job roles. As such the process had not been conducted properly and the selection was therefore unfair.

Had the Firm carried out the process fairly then it was very reasonable to expect that Claire would have scored higher than the next lowest comparator. The appeal process was unsuccessful and after Lawson West had engaged with the Government’s ACAS Early Conciliation Service, Lawson West brought a claim of compensation against the firm. After setting out Claire’s case and having the opportunity to present the genuine facts of the matter, the case was capable of being settled to compensate her for her loss of earnings.

  • The reality of the situation shows how important it is to follow a fair and unbiased procedure when going through redundancies and how business must not rush in to predetermined decisions. It is always important to ‘take the personality’ out of the redundancy process to ensure that decision makers remain proportionate and impartial.

It is very tough for businesses currently within the Coronavirus pandemic. The uncertainty and change have brought about all new problems that no one had a plan for.  Businesses are being run by people who are exceptionally stressed, tired and afraid. Whilst there is a huge level of sympathy for businesses, it does not mean that you are able to stray away from employment law.  Unfairly selecting an employee redundancy is unfair and against employment law provisions. 

  • It is important not to make rash, emotional decisions at this time, particularly ones that can led to repercussions. Whether you are the employer or employee you need to ensure you make the right people-making decisions, based upon the right information. If the company owner is too upset to think clearly, arrange a working party to offer guidance and assistance or consider outsourcing the process to a third party.

At Lawson West Solicitors we can make the emotional decision for you. Don’t risk getting it wrong. Don’t let the emotion you are feeling at that moment cause you further upset and detriment by having to defend yourself or go through litigation. In the case of Claire, we could happily assist with some early intervention to avoid full litigation where possible, or continue a claim through to the Employment Tribunal if necessary, where she would no doubt be awarded compensation.

Employment strip

If you are facing difficulties at work and need supportive advice, please contact any of our solicitors in the employment team at Lawson West Solicitors.
We’re here to help. 

Contact Us here.

This case study is provided as example only and is based on the types of employment law case managed by Lawson West. All names and situation details have been changed to protect the individuals and the employers. Please note that this is a basic overview only and should not be construed or relied upon as advice. Lawson West Solicitors Limited accepts no duty of care to any third party in connection with this case study. You are encouraged to seek legal advice for your own set of circumstances and actions may differ from those illustrated.

Why a recession can be a good time to start a business

See Padraig Belton’s BBC article here from 18th June:  

What do General Motors, Burger King, CNN, Uber and Airbnb all have in common?

 

David Heys comments:

“Reading the BBC article about why a recession can be a good time to start a business got me thinking about the challenges and I actually think that the Coronavirus Pandemic is a very different situation to most other recessions. 

For a start, there appears to be a huge fear of the UK going into recession which I think might be slightly irrational. Why?  Because a recession is a significant decline in economic activity over several months and, frankly, I find it difficult to see how this could ever have been avoided. So it is no surprise and we must just get on with it and, yes, there will be some fallout and a rise in unemployment figures and people spending less. Individually we can’t change any of that but what we can do is focus on our businesses with a passion and, unlike the last recession, where there was misery and gloom because of the credit crunch, here so far money is available and I feel there is a real will and desire of people everywhere in this country to get on with their lives and embrace the challenges ahead.  No more so than in the East Midlands and in Leicester in particular.

So I think it’s a great time to start a business or buy a business or start with a new product or service, but of course the desire to do this is not quite the same thing as achieving anything and shear drive and determination on their own are probably not enough. 

David Heys 2

The importance of a business plan

I have worked with many businesses of all kinds over the years and the most successful are almost always working to some form of plan. Often the plan is changed as opportunities arise but there is usually an overall goal.

A good support team behind you

However, crucially, behind the plan is usually a dedicated team of professionals. That does not mean these people have to be in the business. On the contrary, it is usually better for them to be outside looking in; external advisers who are specialists in their field and who have the expertise and experience of working with other businesses and I think the team should be made up of the following:-

  • A good pro-active accountant – not someone who fills in your tax returns once a year but someone who is on the end of the phone (and indeed should be all external advisers) able to give advice, help with understanding the numbers and profits which are crucial to business planning. The accountant should be someone looking forward as well as back, helping you monitor cashflow, looking for bumps in the road but also helping you understand which areas are making good profit and which are not.

  • A general business adviser – we have a non-executive director but really even a small business needs an external person who is experienced in business that they can bounce ideas off, do sanity checks and also who can provide some coaching or mentoring.

  • A good pro-active lawyer (well I would say that wouldn’t I!). Solicitors are often seen as a necessary evil, but in business matters having a pro-active lawyer involved in project discussions at the outset can pay dividends later. For example, in how the business should be structured (your accountant should also be thinking about this from a tax point of view) and also having some eye to your plan and eventual exit.

The final point I would say to any person starting a new business or looking to expand their existing business is to think about their exit. Most people go into business but have no real idea how they will leave.  However, you will definitely leave the business and, if you plan it right, you have a good chance of doing so at a time and manner of your choosing.

So I think that the BBC article is spot on.  Now is a great time to start to expand your business, the world is ready to embrace change so let’s be part of it.”

David Heys, dheys@lawson-west.co.uk 

 

6 Ways to Leave Your Lease

Question:

I’m not sure I really need these premises – how do I get out of the lease?

Answer:

There are six main ways for a Tenant to get out of your lease.  You do need to be careful because most leases have the statutory protection of Part II of the Landlord & Tenant Act 1954 (the 1954 Act).  This Act contains complicated procedures aimed at protecting Tenants but failure to follow these procedures can result in you as a Tenant losing rights or incurring additional costs and obligations:

 

1. Leave when the lease ends

– this is the obvious solution. The lease is for a fixed term so, provided you vacate (completely) the premises on or before the last day of the fixed term then the lease will come to an end on that last day.  No notice needs to be served.

However, you will remain liable for any outstanding obligations e.g. any rent arrears.

 

2. By notice

– a normal lease has a statutory protection (Landlord & Tenant Act 1954) so if you can’t completely vacate the premises by the end date of the lease, then you can serve three months notice on the Landlord and the lease will end when that notice expires. This is called a Section 27 Notice.  For example, if the lease has one month to go and you are unable to leave in that time, then you can serve the three months notice and the lease will end in three months.

But, this Section 27 Notice might not work if you or the Landlord have served any other notices under the 1954 Act.

There is no special form of notice, but it does need to be served in the methods required by the 1954 Act or, if different, in accordance with the lease.  Failure to do this could mean the notice is invalid so you might have to start all over again or, worse, this method may no longer be available due to a change in the circumstances.

 

3. Break clause

– a break clause is the right for one party (sometimes both) to terminate the lease before the end of the agreed term e.g. in a ten year lease, the Tenant might have the right to end the lease at the end of Year 5.

Check whether there is such a clause in your lease and whether there are any critical dates.  There is usually an obligation to serve a notice on the Landlord six months before the “Break Date”, e.g. if you can end the lease at the end of Year 3, the notice would have to be served on the Landlord within the first two and a half years. 

Be very careful with this because there are usually conditions attached e.g. that rent is up to date and failure to comply with those conditions and/or failure to serve the proper notice or serve it in the right way could mean that the break is invalid and you lose your right to end the lease.

 

4. Formal surrender

– this is where both Landlord and Tenant agree that the lease comes to an end. If none of the other methods apply e.g., you are in the middle of a ten year lease with no break clause you can always ask your Landlord if they will accept a surrender of the lease and if the Landlord agrees then the lease will come to an end at that point.  The obvious problem is getting the Landlord to agree, after all they will then be missing out on rent for the rest of the term so the Landlord may well ask for a payment.  However, that is not always the case and the Landlord might be happy to have the premises back e.g. for a possible development or perhaps because they have a Tenant lined up who will pay a higher rent.  The Landlord may even want to use the premises themselves.

Surrender is not an easy way out – for a start a normal lease under the 1954 Act means certain procedures may need to be followed – but it can be the most effective because, for example, the surrender often draws a line under any other obligations that might be outstanding under the lease and any previous breaches of the lease obligations by the Tenant.

5. Implied surrender

– it is also possible to surrender the lease informally. This is called surrender “by operation of the law”.  This means the parties each doing acts that clearly show they intend the lease come to an end.  A seemingly obvious act is the Tenant handing over the keys and the Landlord accepting them. 

The problem is the lack of proof of the real intention of the parties, e.g. as Tenant you may hand back the keys but, several months later, the Landlord may claim that they did not intend a surrender and simply took the keys for security purposes.  Also, with an implied surrender it is difficult for there to be any record of any other terms that were agreed e.g. payment to be made or repairs to be done. 

The purpose of properly written legal agreements is to minimise the risk of later arguments and the problem with any informal arrangement, including an implied surrender, is that it usually leaves grey areas which can lead to expensive disputes, particularly if someone is involved who is not one of the original parties.

 

6. So called “dirty tricks”

– there are sometimes attempts to trick, persuade or force another party into a course of action by creating a difficult situation on purpose. For example, as above, a surrender by operation of law means that both parties have to do something which indicates their clear intention that the lease should come to an end.  For example, I came across a Tenant who put his keys through the Landlord’s letter box hoping that the Landlord would just accept the position.  The Landlord at first objected but unfortunately made the error of doing work to the property which, although these included repairing damage caused by the Tenant, were enough to constitute an acceptance of the keys and therefore a valid surrender.  Worse, the works were done six months after the Tenant had left but the surrender was deemed to have taken place the day the keys were dropped through the letter box (being the date of the “offer”) so the Landlord could not even claim rent after that period.

Another example is a Tenant who deliberately withheld rent and caused damage to the premises in an attempt to get the Landlord to terminate the lease and repossess the property.  Again, this worked because the Landlord felt it was better, from a commercial point of view, to have the premises back rather than continue the damaged relationship (and obviously take the opportunity to get a better Tenant next time!).  Obviously, the former Tenant remained liable for rent arrears and damage to the property.

When you sign a lease you are entering into a binding and legal commitment and you should do so having thought of the future so far as you can.  For example, do not enter into long leases if you do not have long term plans with those premises.  Having signed a lease, you will however see there are still ways to get out of the arrangement if you wish to do so.

There are two other options you probably need to consider which are assignment and sub-letting.  Neither bring the lease to an end but they can still be very useful in avoiding or reducing further costs.

Assignment is the transfer of the lease to another party.  As you would expect, this means you need the Landlord’s approval which usually the Landlord cannot unreasonably withhold or delay.  The Landlord’s concern will be to ensure that the incoming Tenant will be able to comply with the lease and, in particular, to pay the rent. 

However, the thing to remember is that the lease continues to exist and you will usually have to act as a guarantor for the incoming Tenant.  The idea is that it is you that finds the new Tenant and therefore you share the risk with the Landlord if the Tenant fails to pay the rent. 

Obviously, the new Tenant (assignee) steps into your shoes and complies with all the other terms of the lease including payment of rent.  You only need become involved if the Tenant fails to comply with their obligations. Once the lease has expired then your obligations cease.

Sub-letting is where you remain responsible to your Landlord for the least and find someone to become your own Tenant.  The Sub-Tenant then pays rent to you and you pay rent to your Landlord as before.  This can be particularly useful if the premises have a higher rental value than when you took the lease so the rent you receive is more than the rent you pay to the Landlord and you make a profit.  Even if the rental value has gone down, having rent from a Sub-Tenant can be set against the amount you actually pay to your Landlord.  This is useful because if the market has dropped then you may find it very difficult to assign the lease.

A further possibility is to sub-let part of the building.  This allows you to use part of the premises but get an income from the remainder.

Remember:  As you remain the Tenant of your own Landlord, you are still responsible for making sure all those original lease obligations are complied with.

Beverley HeysBecki

For further help call either Beverley Heys on 0116 212 1058 bheys@lawson-west.co.uk or Rebecca Beswick on 0116 212 1021 rbeswick@lawson-west.co.uk