A business owner who sacked his pregnant wife two days after she found his receipts for ‘adult entertainment’ has been ordered to pay her more than £15,000.

Financial consultant Nicole Ramsay was working for her then-husband Stephen’s lawn care company when she confronted him over spending more than £500 on X-rated online services.

A tribunal of employment heard that the managing director fired his wife, 33 years old and seven months pregnant with their fourth child.

Nicole was pregnant, desperate for Universal Credit. However her ex-husband withheld her payslips, a vital part of benefit-claiming.

Additionally, abusive messages and Whatsapp messages were sent to her. Her house key was taken and her work phone confiscated. Also her car insurance was stopped.

Now, Ms Ramsay has successfully sued the 40-year-old for marriage discrimination and won more than £15,000 in compensation from him.

Nicole Ramsay (above) was working for her then-husband Stephen Ramsay's lawn care company in Southend-on-Sea when she was sacked while pregnant with their fourth child for challenging him on his X-rated porn purchases

Nicole Ramsay (above), was working at her husband Stephen Ramsay’s Southend-on-Sea lawn care business when she was pregnant with their fourth baby. She was fired for questioning him about his X-rated porn purchases

In east London, the tribunal heard that Mrs Ramsay began working in August 2015 as an administrative manager for and secretary at her husband’s Southend-on-Sea lawncare company.

At the hearing, Mrs Ramsay was informed that she had learned in March 2019 that she was pregnant with her fourth child. The baby would be born on November 2019 after a planned pregnancies.

But Mrs Ramsay, who was 31 weeks pregnant at the time, questioned her husband regarding three receipts that she found.

The receipts were for £179.99 each, totalling £539.97, for online adult entertainment services and were all within a 23 hour period, the tribunal heard. The couple decided to end their relationship after the confrontation.

Mrs Ramsay was shocked to awaken the next morning and discover that her husband had stolen her house key. He also sent her abusive WhatsApp and SMS messages.

Ramsay sent one message to his employees: “You don’t need, not as if you did any anyway… Why do you continue working?” 

“I don’t want any of it to be in your hands anymore… I’d prefer to close down my company than get anything from you… 

“After all you’ve done in the last couple years, you don’t merit anything. If you want to try, I’ll make sure you get nothing.”

She answered the phone in an efficient manner throughout the day, although she was eventually sent more aggressive and inappropriate messages by Mr Ramsay regarding the breakup of her marriage.

These messages were considered threatening and abusive by the tribunal.

Stephen (left) spent more than £530 in less than 24 hours on X-rated adult entertainment. Two days later, and Nicole was fired, sent abusive text messages had her house key taken

Stephen (left) spent more than £530 in less than 24 hours on X-rated adult entertainment. Nicole, who had sent her abusive texts and demanded that she be fired, got her house key removed two days later.

Mr Ramsay stopped Mrs Ramsay’s company-fuel card two days after receipts were discovered. Also, her work telephone was stopped.

Tribunal ruled that the tribunal was correct because of marital issues.

Ramsay stated in one message that his fuel card would not work from today. He advised him to get a new phone immediately as I will not fund it.

He then asked her when she was going to be taking maternity leave. She answered, “You can get a job starting at the beginning of your leave.”

According to the tribunal, Mr Ramsay left the home on his own one week after their separation. Mrs Ramsay lost her consent and contract was cancelled without her knowledge.

The company had arranged her car insurance and provided payment for it for both personal and business purposes. But, the cancellation was sudden and abrupt. It took less than fifteen hours for her to get new insurance.

Tribunal heard that her stress due to this and her late-stage pregnancy had caused her medical issues.

On October 19, 2019, Mrs Ramsay began divorce proceedings.

A fourth child was born to the couple, a baby girl. She started her maternity leaves in November 2019, which were due to expire in October 2020.

According to the tribunal, she didn’t return to work during her maternity leave. She started in November 2020 a new position as a financial adviser.

Mr Ramsay continued to pay her during her maternity leave but reduced her monthly salary from £1,500 to £1,250.

The tribunal heard further deductions were made until the end of her maternity leave, totalling more than £10,000.

Mike Hallen is an Employment Judge. He said that ’emotional worry and intimidation are the main causes of unemployment. [Mrs Ramsay]As a result of the actions taken [Mr Ramsay]Her worry caused her to have a difficult pregnancy.

«[She]She was traumatized when her key to her job was taken from her possessions.

“She was informed via text that they were no longer necessary at her workplace and she would be losing access to all work systems without notice. The stopping of her petrol card and insurance for her vehicle also adversely affected her.

“Having three young children and being very pregnant, trying to get car insurance. She was not provided with any information from her former insurer. [Mrs Ramsay] stress.

“She asked for payslips repeatedly that she was missing, but they were not given to her. They were vital in order for her claim Universal Credit.

“The constant harassment of her wages, and the flood of irrelevant and threatening email from Ramsay caused her anxiety.

«[Mrs Ramsay’s]The mortgage and many other bills were in arrears due to her slowly decreasing salary. [her]Stress can be added.

Mrs Ramsay was awarded £10,568 for unauthorised deductions from wages and £5,000 in compensation for ‘injury to feelings’ in respect of her direct marriage discrimination claim.

Other claims she made regarding pregnancy discrimination or victimisation were rejected.