Case Study: Protective award claim following the liquidation of a care provider
6th Nov 2026
Author: Butcher & Barlow
What happened
In March 2025 twenty former employees of Eden Care Service Limited were dismissed without notice or redundancy consultation after the Cheshire care provider went into liquidation. Having been told that they would receive redundancy payments, they then discovered that their claims had been refused.
The Redundancy Payments Service (RPS) had rejected the claims on the basis that their employment had transferred to another care provider, Ablewell Care. Several employees were left in financial difficulty and were unsure how to challenge the decision.
Butcher & Barlow’s Employment Law Team represented the group in pursuing their claims and secured the maximum protective award applicable to their case.
Understanding the impact
When an employer becomes insolvent, employees may be dealing with the immediate loss of their income while trying to understand what they are owed. A refusal of payment can add further uncertainty, particularly when they have been given assurances that it will be paid.
In this case, the employees were unaware that they could seek a tribunal decision to challenge the RPS refusal. They also did not know that the lack of redundancy consultation could give rise to a separate protective award claim.
Our role was to explain those rights clearly, establish the facts and guide the employees through the process of pursuing them.
What we did
We arranged a meeting with the group to review their circumstances and the documents they had received. We considered how the dismissals had been handled and whether the requirements for a collective redundancy consultation claim were met.
The alleged transfer was a central issue. TUPE is the name given to rules that protect employment rights when a business or service changes hands. Whether those rules applied here required a careful examination of what had actually happened.
We reviewed employment contracts, dismissal letters, pay slips and new employment documents. We also approached Ablewell Care for a statement explaining how care clients had moved across and how it had recruited staff. This helped us address the transfer argument rather than accept the basis on which payments had been refused.
There was also a dispute about when the employees’ employment had ended. P45s and new employment contracts helped establish the sequence of events and support their position.
We notified Acas on the group’s behalf, prepared the Employment Tribunal claim and liaised with the liquidators over consent to proceed. We then addressed the Secretary of State’s defence, prepared witness statements and represented the employees at the hearing.
The outcome
Following proceedings lasting around 12 months, all 20 employees secured a protective award equivalent to 90 days’ pay each, the maximum applicable to their case, for the failure to comply with collective redundancy consultation obligations.
Throughout the case, we provided regular updates on significant developments. Each employee could contact the team with questions, helping them remain informed as the disputed issues were addressed.
Employees do not need two years’ service to qualify for a protective award, but strict time limits apply to bringing a claim.
If you have concerns about how your redundancy was handled or have been refused redundancy payments, our Employment Law Team can help you understand your position and the options available to you.
The team can be contacted on 0161 764 4062 or alternatively complete our enquiry form.
Footnote: At the time of writing, the written judgment was still being awaited, and payments had not yet been received. The separate redundancy payment element remained to be finalised. Payments towards the protective award through the RPS are subject to an eight-week limit and statutory weekly pay caps, and payments already made for arrears of pay can affect the amount available.