Home » News » Knight Frank firm ordered to pay dismissed property manager £24,000
Regulation & Law

Knight Frank firm ordered to pay dismissed property manager £24,000

Residential block manager wins cash after taking agency to Tribunal and winning case against agency's Promise subsidiary.

Nigel Lewis

one elephant knight frank

A subsidiary of Knight Frank is to pay an employee it dismissed unfairly a total of £24,000 following an Employment Tribunal hearing in central London.

The case involves the agency’s Promise division, which is a wholly-owned subsidiary established to employ all on-site staff within properties under its management, and former employee Dino Fetnaci.

He had been employed by property management specialist Rendall & Ritner from November 2017 to manage a large residential block in London’s central Elephant & Castle district and then was transferred via a TUPE arrangement when Knight Frank took over the block via its subsidiary Promise.

But arguments arose between Fetnaci and Promise’s management. He claimed his workload had increased hugely following his role transferring including an online and accreditation training programme that required hours of study and interaction.


Promise on the other hand claimed that he had not completed mandatory risk assessment paperwork, followed occupation health procedures or managed contractors properly.

Fetnaci disputed these claims but after a disciplinary hearing was dismissed in March last year, which he then contested internally and then via an Employment Tribunal.

Following a lengthy and detailed hearing, the judge reviewed mitigating circumstances including that Promise had not made Fetnaci’s responsibilities clear to him before he ‘joined’ the company and that he faced an increased workload including a requirement to learn and adjust to a new management system.

The judge said Fetnaci was to an extent culpable including not compiling a risk register which could have led to enforcement action but the manner in which he was dismissed by Promise, and the fact that dismissal was ‘not a reasonable sanction’, led to the judge awarding him the cash.

Read the full judgement.

Read more about Employment Tribunals.

May 31, 2022

What's your opinion?

Please note: This is a site for professional discussion. Comments will carry your full name and company.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.