The situation
The Home Office had identified several individuals whom it believed had been working illegally for the organisation. The potential financial exposure was substantial.
The business disputed the allegations. For one individual, it maintained that the person was neither an employee nor a worker and had no role within its operational team. For the others, it disputed the conclusion that they had been working illegally.
An extension to the original response deadline had already been secured. The instruction required us to investigate the client’s account and identify the evidence supporting its position for each person.
The challenge
The individuals’ circumstances raised different questions. For the person whom the business said it had never employed or engaged, we needed to establish why they were present, what they were doing and the nature of any connection with the organisation.
For the remaining individuals, the investigation concerned their immigration permission, the work undertaken and the employer’s right to work records.
The response also needed to address the evidence underlying the Home Office’s conclusions. That required a detailed chronology and supporting records capable of explaining the circumstances encountered during the investigation.
Our approach
We examined the allegations person by person. Our work focused on establishing each individual’s relationship with the organisation, their activities at the relevant time and the evidence available to support the client’s account.
For the disputed employment relationship, the investigation considered who had asked the individual to attend, whether anyone had instructed them to carry out work and whether payment or another business relationship explained their presence.
We sought detailed witness accounts from those able to explain what had occurred. Those accounts needed to be checked against contemporaneous documents, including relevant communications, payment records, schedules and records explaining attendance at the premises.
For individuals the business accepted it had employed or engaged, we examined their immigration position and the right to work checks undertaken. The chronology needed to establish when employment began, what permission existed at the relevant time and what evidence the organisation had obtained and retained.
We also considered the basis for the Home Office’s findings. The task was to identify the evidence supporting those findings and assess whether the organisation’s records supported a challenge.
The client was asked to organise its evidence and distinguish documented events from suspicions about how the investigation had begun. Keeping the response focused on verifiable facts helped direct attention to the issues relevant to liability.
Our preparation brought those strands together into a separate factual and evidential account for each individual. Any vulnerabilities also needed to be identified so the client could receive realistic advice about its position and potential exposure.
Value delivered
Our work gave the client a structured basis for responding to the allegations, with each individual’s circumstances examined separately.
The investigation identified the employment and immigration questions requiring an answer, the records needed to support the client’s account and the points requiring further clarification.
That preparation supported a response directed at the Home Office’s findings and the evidence relevant to each alleged instance of illegal working.
Civil penalty investigation support
DavidsonMorris advises businesses responding to Home Office civil penalty investigations, including disputed employment relationships, right to work evidence and challenges to alleged liability.
Speak to our team about an illegal working investigation →
