A Surrey fish and chip shop owner has been hit with a £40,000 fine by the Home Office for hiring a man who allegedly forged his identity—despite the business following standard hiring processes and paying the employee through HMRC’s PAYE system.
Mark Sullivan, who runs Big Fry Fish & Chips in Egham, described the penalty as “devastating” and warned it could spell the end for his small business. The case has fuelled growing calls from business groups to reform civil penalty rules that treat large corporations and small independents alike, with no sliding scale for size or intent.
The fine was issued after a March 2024 raid by immigration officers, who removed an employee alleged to have used another person’s identity, including a forged passport. When the man was hired in early 2023, he provided a national insurance number, student loan repayment records, and housing benefit receipts. The only clerical error, Sullivan says, was not seeing the original passport.
“We owned up when we found out,” said Sullivan. “We told them what happened, but we were given no right to defend ourselves.”
A lawyer warned him that appealing the fine could double it to £80,000, so he opted to pay the reduced £28,000 within 21 days, though he maintains the hire was made in good faith.
According to Home Office correspondence, only original ID documentation—such as a genuine passport—is considered valid for right-to-work checks. Other paperwork like NI numbers or housing benefit letters are not sufficient proof of legal employment status.
Despite cooperating fully and receiving a £5,000 discount, Sullivan was told he could have received a further £5,000 off if he had reported his suspicions to the UK Visas and Immigration hotline. However, Sullivan says there were no red flags at the time.
“He had a bank account, a university education, housing benefit, a student loan. Where were the red flags for us?” Sullivan asked. “He was already working when he came to us.”
The Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) has called the penalty structure “disproportionate” and warned that many small businesses live in fear of accidentally falling foul of complex and rigid immigration rules.
“This is a case of an honest mistake met with inflexible punishment,” said Craig Beaumont, FSB Executive Director. “Small employers are not immigration officers. They need a system that recognises genuine intent and treats them accordingly—not one that issues crushing fines that could threaten their survival.”
From July 2023 to March 2024, the Home Office issued 1,508 civil penalty notices, each potentially as high as £45,000 per illegal worker, following last year’s increase from the previous £15,000 ceiling. The policy applies uniformly, regardless of business size or turnover.
The case comes amid a broader crackdown on illegal working. Prime Minister Keir Starmer has vowed to pursue enforcement “on a completely unprecedented scale”, following deals with France over small boat crossings. In recent weeks, the UK’s largest food delivery firms have also been pressured to step up identity checks.
A government spokesperson said: “Employers are responsible for carrying out right to work checks and there is comprehensive guidance and support on how to do this. The checks are free and take minutes to complete, with businesses able to utilise digital ID verification technology.”
Yet many small businesses argue that the system still leaves them vulnerable to unintentional breaches—with high-stakes consequences and little room for explanation.
Sullivan’s case has now become a lightning rod for the debate over how immigration enforcement is balanced against the operational reality of running a small business.
“I’ve employed people all my life,” Sullivan said. “I’ve never employed anyone illegally on purpose. This is just an honest mistake that could cost me everything.”
