Hello what is the exact relationship please?
This is not necessarily an easy question to answer. In effect you could have easily been employed but simply been having difficulty in getting paid. There are many cases were someone works for another and is an employee or worker but gets no remuneration for various reasons, such as financial difficulties of the employer, dispute over the amount owed, etc. So the simple fact you were not getting paid does not mean you were unemployed – you may have still been employed and you should have been paid for the time worked but the employer just did not pay you as required of them. So you are going to find it difficult to claim you were unemployed because you were not really – you were employed, just not getting paid. These are fundamentally different. Being unemployed means actually not holding a job and not working for anyone. Working for someone and not getting paid does not equal unemployment – you are still in employment, just having difficulties not getting paid.
I hope this has answered your query. I would be grateful if you could please take a second to leave a positive rating (3, 4 or 5 stars) as that is an important part of our process and recognises the time I have spent assisting you. If you need me to clarify anything before you go - please get back to me on here and I will assist further as best as I can. Thank you
Potentially, yes. The fact that you are not doing any work for him and not getting paid does not mean there was no ongoing contract in place. Let’s take zero hours contracts for example. There could be prolonged periods where no work is offered and no pay is given but there is still a contract in place. So unless steps were taken to terminate the contract, it could be assumed that one was still in place. Only a court can decide if this was the case though
you are welcome, all the best