A caretaker at a stately home gave away a Tudor artefact worth £5million to an antiques dealer after dismissing it as "rotten" rubbish, an employment tribunal has heard.
Brian Wilson was sacked from his role at Grade II-listed Seighford Hall, Staffordshire, after giving a 9ft-wide overmantel to Andrew Potter in April 2020.
The oak piece, which features the coat of arms of Elizabeth I, had been displayed above a fireplace at the derelict former nursing home for centuries.
Details of how the 460-year-old antique was given away have now emerged after Mr Wilson took his employers to tribunal, claiming unfair dismissal.
Mr Wilson said that he had mistakenly dismissed the £5million item as “rotten”, placing it in a pile ready to be burned before “prospective buyer” Mr Potter asked to retrieve it.
Mr Wilson, who had worked at Seighford Hall since 1998 before he was dismissed last year, told the tribunal: “I let him have it, as far as I was concerned it was less rubbish for me to get rid of”.
The local council took out and later dropped an injunction to prevent Mr Potter from selling the item, which auctioneers valued at £5 million, and he is reportedly now trying to find a buyer in the Middle East.
The tribunal heard that Mr Wilson lived in a caravan on the grounds of the mansion “to deal with any security and maintenance issues”.
After the hall’s managing director, Christopher Smith, instructed a building surveyor to inspect the site, police carried out an unannounced visit in August or September 2020.
A formal report of theft was made after police said there was no crime reference number linked to a break-in Mr Wilson claimed he had reported, in which he said that items including a tractor and overmantel had been stolen.
After Mr Smith discovered that a historic fireplace from the hall had been sold to a local antique shop, Mr Wilson was asked in a letter to attend a meeting about selling items without authorisation.
Mr Wilson, who was fired in November 2020, said he was unaware of the request because he had moved home and had not received the letter.
Judge Kate Hindmarch ruled that while Mr Wilson was unfairly dismissed and entitled to £4,065.82 in unlawful deduction from wages and untaken holiday pay, he was not eligible for additional compensation because his “actions were without permission”.
She concluded: "I have found [Mr Wilson's] actions were without permission and that he was not credible in his explanations. His behaviour was blameworthy, and I find the basic award should be nil."
