A male nanny was dismissed by his millionaire employer for demanding that she pay for his torn ligament surgery after he sliced his wrist while preparing a lobster for her son's dinner. An employment tribunal heard that Brian Handford was being paid £36k a year to tutor Yulia Shkop's son and had moved into their £5 million mansion for his full-time position.
Mr Handford was lapping up the life of luxury in the Russian family's home on the exclusive Wentworth Estate of Ascot where he was welcome to use their private pool and tennis court. He had grown close to his employers but things quickly turned sour when he was asked to take on a new responsibility for a night, the Mirror reports.
Brian, who refers to himself as a 'Manny', was asked to prepare lobsters that had been delivered for dinner after the household chef had left. Having never done it before, he was forced to watch some YouTube tutorials on how to chop and cook the crustacean but injured his right wrist while cutting through the shell.
His injury required surgery and three months of rehabilitation and the nanny expected his employer to cover the costs of his treatment. However, she was reluctant to pay and later fired Mr Handford and banished him from her home following an argument.
The employment tribunal held in Watford heard how their working relationship deteriorated after the accident in February 2021. Mr Handford, who also had a photography business, was employed by Ms Shkop during the midst of the pandemic in September 2020.
He was forced to live under a 'strict regime of isolation' and was ordered to keep the family's eight-year-old son safe. The 'manny' was forbidden from leaving the estate and could not even enter a supermarket without having to isolate for five days as a consequence.
Mr Handford had 'a lot of fun' teaching the boy and spent a lot of time with the family who he dined with most evenings. However, disaster struck when two live lobsters were delivered to the house in boxes filled with ice and Ms Shkop asked Mr Handford to cook them that evening.
She specified that he should freeze and cut them up before boiling so that the child would not be upset by their screams. He called the chef, who had already gone home that night, for advice and was advised to watch a YouTube tutorial.
The nanny then tore his scapholunate ligament by pressing down hard on the knife as he struggled to prepare the 'unusual and expensive' dinner for a child. His injury required an operation followed by six weeks of complete immobilisation and a further six weeks of physiotherapy.
Mr Handford told the tribunal that he and Ms Shkop later got into an argument after she refused to take 'any personal responsibility' following the accident. The millionaire was left 'drastically upset' by the situation and made the decision to move him into a staff cottage elsewhere on the grounds because her son had heard them bickering.
Just two days later, Mr Handford was ordered to leave the premises entirely in July 2021. The tribunal accepted his version of events and rejected Ms Shkop's claims that he had injured his wrist while swimming in their pool.
However his claim of unfair dismissal failed because the employee had a 'loss of faith and trust' in him after their disagreement. Employment judge Nathaniel Caiden said: “[Mr Handford] stated that he was asked by the Respondent to prepare the lobsters, having been asked to contact the chef to find out their shelf life and how best to prepare them.
"The tribunal prefers his account on this and finds he was asked in effect to prepare the lobsters once it was concluded there was a risk they would not last until the following day. [Ms Shkop] simply stated in her witness statement that she did not ask [him] to cook the lobsters, but she never explains why [he] would opt to cook such an unusual and expensive food.
"[Mr Handford] had no knowledge on how to cook lobsters and his own evidence was that he initially thought that they were boiled but instead following contact with the chef opted to stun them by freezing them. It was disputed whether the cause of the injury was the preparation of the lobsters. Once again, [we] accept it was the cause [because] there was no other competing explanation that made more sense.
[Ms Shkop] in live evidence actually stated ‘I don't doubt or question his version of events of how the injury to hand occurred’. Fundamentally, she was of the opinion that [Mr Handford] was arguing too much in the meeting [and] ignored in her view the generosity she had always offered.
"This may be classed as a loss of trust and confidence." The tribunal also dismissed Mr Handford's claim for an unlawful deduction of wages.
It was ruled in favour of his claim that Ms Shkop was in breach of the requirement to provide an amended written statement of particulars, in relation to being unable to work because of sickness but concluded he was not owed any compensation.
Don't miss the latest news from around Scotland and beyond - sign up to our daily newsletter here .
