Vento bands 2026: what employment tribunals actually award for injury to feelings
| Lower band | £1,300 to £12,600 |
|---|---|
| Middle band | £12,600 to £37,700 |
| Upper band | £37,700 to £62,900 |
| Median award in our study | £13,000 |
2025 bands and every year since 2017
The median is from 47 awards in 44 employment tribunal decisions from 2022 to 2026 that ProofSnap read, all with messages in evidence; 25 of the 47 fell in the middle band. Injury to feelings is only part of the compensation: lost earnings and interest are separate amounts.
By Radim Motycka, founder and lead developer of ProofSnap · · 15 min read
Which Vento band applies to your claim?
The bands depend on the date the claim form (ET1) was presented to the tribunal, not on the date of the harassment or of the hearing. Pick that date to see the figures that apply.
Claims presented on or after 6 April 2026
- Lower band£1,300 to £12,600
- Middle band£12,600 to £37,700
- Upper band£37,700 to £62,900
- Most exceptional casesover £62,900
Source: Ninth Addendum to the Presidential Guidance, 30 March 2026.
In Scotland the figures apply subject to paragraph 12 of the original guidance.
Key figures
- £13,000Median injury to feelings award in the 47 awards from 44 tribunal decisions.
- 17 of 47Awards where messages were the key evidence: the unlawful act was in a message, or a message resolved a disputed fact.
Your evidence decides the band
The tribunal places an award by how serious the treatment was and how it affected you, and both have to be shown. Where messages were the key evidence, the median award was £16,000; where they only supported the account, £11,000.
Certified transcript in 48 hours, $59.99 (approx. £44.69).
1. Vento bands 2026, 2025 and every year since 2017
An award for discrimination or harassment can include compensation for injured feelings: section 119 of the Equality Act 2010 says so for the courts, and a tribunal's compensation corresponds to it. The amount is pitched by reference to three bands named after a 2002 Court of Appeal judgment; since September 2017 the Presidents of the Employment Tribunals in England and Wales and in Scotland have set the figures in Presidential Guidance, and each spring an addendum uprates them using the Retail Prices Index, most recently the Ninth Addendum of 30 March 2026.
The table gives every period since 2017, as published on the judiciary website. The period is fixed by the date the claim was presented, so a hearing in 2026 on a claim presented in 2024 uses the 2024 bands.
| Claims presented | Lower band | Middle band | Upper band | Exceptional cases |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6 Apr 2026onwardsCurrentNinth Addendum, 30 March 2026 | £1,300 to £12,600 | £12,600 to £37,700 | £37,700 to £62,900 | over £62,900 |
| 6 Apr 2025to 5 Apr 2026Eighth Addendum, 27 March 2025 | £1,200 to £12,100 | £12,100 to £36,400 | £36,400 to £60,700 | over £60,700 |
| 6 Apr 2024to 5 Apr 2025Seventh Addendum, 25 March 2024 | £1,200 to £11,700 | £11,700 to £35,200 | £35,200 to £58,700 | over £58,700 |
| 6 Apr 2023to 5 Apr 2024Sixth Addendum, 24 March 2023 | £1,100 to £11,200 | £11,200 to £33,700 | £33,700 to £56,200 | over £56,200 |
| 6 Apr 2022to 5 Apr 2023Fifth Addendum, 28 March 2022 | £990 to £9,900 | £9,900 to £29,600 | £29,600 to £49,300 | over £49,300 |
| 6 Apr 2021to 5 Apr 2022Fourth Addendum, 26 March 2021 | £900 to £9,100 | £9,100 to £27,400 | £27,400 to £45,600 | over £45,600 |
| 6 Apr 2020to 5 Apr 2021Third Addendum, 27 March 2020 | £900 to £9,000 | £9,000 to £27,000 | £27,000 to £45,000 | over £45,000 |
| 6 Apr 2019to 5 Apr 2020Second Addendum, 25 March 2019 | £900 to £8,800 | £8,800 to £26,300 | £26,300 to £44,000 | over £44,000 |
| 6 Apr 2018to 5 Apr 2019First Addendum, 23 March 2018 | £900 to £8,600 | £8,600 to £25,700 | £25,700 to £42,900 | over £42,900 |
| 11 Sep 2017to 5 Apr 2018Presidential Guidance, 5 September 2017 | £800 to £8,400 | £8,400 to £25,200 | £25,200 to £42,000 | over £42,000 |
Between the first and the latest figures, the top of the upper band went from £42,000 to £62,900, and the top of the lower band from £8,400 to £12,600, both up 50%. The biggest single steps came with the 2022 and 2023 addenda, when the upper band ceiling rose by £3,700 and then £6,900.
Scotland
Every addendum states that for claims presented in Scotland the bands remain subject to paragraph 12 of the original guidance. That paragraph says that if a tribunal in Scotland decides the 10% uplift built into the bands does not apply, it should adjust the figures and give its reasons. Of the awards in our dataset, 7 come from tribunals sitting in Scotland.
2. Injury to feelings examples: 47 real tribunal awards
We searched the published employment tribunal decisions on GOV.UK for 2022 to 2026 and read the judgments in which a discrimination or harassment complaint succeeded, the tribunal awarded a specific sum for injury to feelings, and messages (WhatsApp, text, email, Teams or social media) were part of the evidence discussed in the findings. Forty-four decisions met all three tests; three of them had two successful claimants, giving 47 awards. Each card links to the decision and gives the paragraph where the award is made; open a card for the message evidence.
Band: as stated by the tribunal, or worked out by ProofSnap from the band period. Full data in the CSV file.
£9,000Lower bandper tribunal
Ms E Satchell v APX Estate Agents Ltd
Key evidence: WhatsApp, email
While on maternity leave, she learned of her dismissal when her P45 was emailed to her; WhatsApp messages showed there had been no prior consultation.
6009619/2024, England and Wales. Interest: £1,666.67.
£5,000Lower bandper tribunal
Mr R Joseph v PizzaExpress Ltd
Supporting: WhatsApp, email
The race-related verbal abuse by a fellow waiter was documented in the claimant's WhatsApp message to management and an emailed witness statement.
8001571/2025, Scotland. Interest: £469.04.
£12,000Middle bandper ProofSnap
Mr A Donovan v Adventure Forest Ltd and Others
Supporting: email, WhatsApp
Emails between the claimant and his manager about the disciplinary allegation, and a WhatsApp group chat, featured in the findings of fact.
2305590/2024, England and Wales. Interest: £2,033.10.
Note: Payable by the first and third respondents.
£17,500Middle bandper tribunal
CX v Secretary of State for Justice
Key evidence: email, text message
A colleague sent her repeated emails and texts pressing her to meet after she asked him to stop, forming part of the sexual harassment.
3303470/2022, England and Wales. Interest: £6,555.07.
Note: £7,500 for belief-related acts plus £10,000 for sexual harassment by a colleague and failure to act; reconsideration refused
£9,000Lower bandper tribunal
Mr J Joseph v Wincanton Group Ltd
Supporting: WhatsApp, email
His manager had earlier contacted him by WhatsApp but sent no message before dismissing him, which supported the inference of discrimination.
2304349/2024 and 2300865/2025, England and Wales. Interest: £1,748.
Note: 25% Acas uplift (£2,250) added; interest calculated on the uplifted sum
£8,000Lower bandper ProofSnap
Ms L Dziegiel v Mr A Mohamed and Shady Coffee Ltd
Key evidence: WhatsApp, email
Her manager blocked her on WhatsApp immediately after she messaged about a disability-related absence, and the employer emailed her GP surgery.
2401490/2024, England and Wales. Interest: £1,881.
Note: Second case number 2402126/2024. A 15% Acas uplift raised the award to £9,200; interest was calculated on £9,200.
£25,000Middle bandper tribunal
Miss K Alder v Pet Friends Ltd (In Vol Liquidation) and Govets Ltd
Supporting: WhatsApp, text message
WhatsApp group messages and texts from her manager were examined; the harassment claims based on them failed, but the messages informed the findings on dismissal.
2407240/2024, England and Wales. Interest: £2,849.34.
Note: against the first respondent only
£3,000Lower bandper tribunal
Mr R Marugah and Ms S Qarouane v Haix Ltd (award 2 of 2)
Supporting: WhatsApp, LinkedIn
After her manager's belittling remark, her engagement was ended by a WhatsApp message from him.
2303111/2024, England and Wales. Interest: £504.33.
Note: second claimant (Ms Qarouane)
£3,000Lower bandper tribunal
Mr R Marugah and Ms S Qarouane v Haix Ltd (award 1 of 2)
Supporting: WhatsApp, text message, LinkedIn
After an age-related remark in a meeting, his manager ended his engagement by text; WhatsApp messages showed the control exercised over him.
2303111/2024, England and Wales. Interest: £499.73.
Note: first claimant (Mr Marugah)
£3,000Lower bandper tribunal
Mr T Makinde v Amazing Angels Care Ltd
Supporting: text message, WhatsApp
A text message supported the finding that he was dismissed, and his removal from the staff WhatsApp group was one of the discriminatory acts.
6019282/2024, England and Wales. Interest: £529.97.
£10,000Lower bandper ProofSnapplus £2,000 aggravated
Mr S I Dowling v Yo! Sushi UK Ltd
Supporting: text message, WhatsApp
WhatsApp messages from a junior colleague reporting a co-worker's conduct, which the claimant read out to HR, featured in the findings.
6007405/2024, England and Wales. Interest: £1,538.63.
£2,000Lower bandper tribunal
Mrs N Puri v Scottish Police Authority
Supporting: WhatsApp, email
Colleagues' WhatsApp group messages critical of her and her emails to HR were examined, though the successful claim concerned an adjustment to the counter height.
8000945/2024, Scotland. Interest: £293.34.
Note: reconsideration application refused
£35,200Middle bandper tribunalplus £5,000 aggravated
X v The Chief Constable of Gwent Police and S Barlow
Supporting: LinkedIn, WhatsApp
A LinkedIn exchange in which the occupational health manager sought legal advice, and WhatsApp messages with his line manager, featured in the findings.
6010112/2025, England and Wales. Interest: £2,927.08.
Note: The stated interest (£2,927.08) covers injury to feelings and aggravated damages together. Claims against the second respondent were withdrawn.
£13,000Middle bandper tribunal
Ms B Hayes v West Leeds Civils Ltd
Key evidence: text message, WhatsApp, email
A colleague's racial remarks about her Irish heritage were made partly in text and WhatsApp messages that were in the bundle.
6015780/2024, England and Wales. Interest: £1,139.71.
£35,000Upper bandper tribunalplus £10,000 aggravated
Key evidence: Snapchat, text message, WhatsApp, email
Sexual harassment included a director's Snapchat messages, and text messages he had kept undermined the theft allegation used to dismiss him.
1601475/2021, England and Wales. Interest: not stated.
Note: Claimant C; D's award is listed separately (1601484/2021). A total of £12,000 for harassment, £20,000 for victimisation and £3,000 for combined protected disclosure and victimisation detriments, from the remedy judgment of 7 April 2024; interest stated per part.
£4,000Lower bandper ProofSnap
Mrs T Craigie v Salisbury Support 4 Autism Ltd
Supporting: WhatsApp, social media, email
Her former manager's contemporaneous WhatsApp messages were weighed in deciding what the director said about her return to work.
3311691/2023, England and Wales. Interest: £706.44.
£12,000Middle bandper tribunal
O Ilunga v Portico Corporate Reception Management Ltd
Key evidence: email, WhatsApp
After she resigned by an email complaining of discrimination, her manager sent an email portraying her as the aggressor, which was found to be victimisation.
2305959/2023, England and Wales. Interest: £2,534.40.
Note: notional £13,000 reduced to £12,000 to avoid double recovery with a £4,500 personal injury award
£20,000Middle bandper tribunal
Ms A Obiagwu v Mr A Greystoke and Pantheon International Advisors Ltd
Supporting: Instagram
Messages to colleagues after the incident and her positive Instagram posts were weighed in deciding whether it happened.
2201555/2024, England and Wales. Interest: £1,437.81.
£12,000Middle bandper ProofSnap
Mrs N Blackwell v Smart Tax and Accountancy Ltd
Supporting: WhatsApp, email, Teams
The claimant's WhatsApp messages and emails to the director about her grievance and her exclusion from Teams calls featured in the findings.
2300727/2022 and 2402823/2022, England and Wales. Interest: not stated.
Note: £12,000 assessed, increased by a 20% Acas uplift to £14,400; interest stated only as a percentage (total with interest £17,568)
£5,000Lower bandper tribunal
Miss F Pealing v The Croft Aberdeen Ltd and A R Eagar
Supporting: text message, WhatsApp
Her text messages to her partner on the night of the incident, and later WhatsApp messages from a director, formed part of the findings.
8000363/2024, Scotland. Interest: £255.
£5,000Lower bandper ProofSnap
Miss A Malik v Mr P Paliga and others
Key evidence: WhatsApp
She was told of her termination by WhatsApp messages from the owners and removed from the work WhatsApp group after Eid leave.
2407391/2023 and 2408700/2023, England and Wales. Interest: £1,113.
Note: a 25% Acas uplift of £1,250 added to the injury to feelings award
£31,000Upper bandper tribunal
Mrs C Clark v Dr Kumutasa and Dr Williams (a Partnership) T/a Gardden Road Surgery
Key evidence: WhatsApp, email, Facebook
A partner's derogatory WhatsApp messages about the claimant, later emailed to the surgery, were the harassment found.
1600163/2023, England and Wales. Interest: £10,658.56.
Note: assessed at £31,000; increased by a 5% Acas uplift to £32,550 in the final totals; the earlier consent judgment only conceded disability status
£12,000Middle bandper tribunalplus £6,000 aggravated
Ms F MacDonald v Alpha Property Management and Services Ltd
Key evidence: WhatsApp, text message, email
The harassment consisted largely of late-night WhatsApp messages from the director with sexual and sex-related remarks.
3312534/2021, England and Wales. Interest: £5,152.44.
Note: Awarded against both respondents jointly and severally. The stated interest (£5,152.44) is on injury to feelings plus aggravated damages (£18,000).
£7,500Lower bandper tribunal
Mr D Cooper v Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd and Mr M Hourihan
Key evidence: LinkedIn, social media, WhatsApp
The unlawful act was a post by his manager on the internal message board and LinkedIn that left the claimant out.
1600755/2023, England and Wales. Interest: £1,585.88.
£29,000Middle bandper tribunal
J Smith v Alpha Plus Group Ltd
Supporting: WhatsApp
WhatsApp exchanges between the claimant and his line manager about his absence and wellbeing are set out in the findings.
2208888/2022, England and Wales. Interest: not stated.
Note: interest of £6,438.14 was calculated on injury to feelings and personal injury together (£38,000), so no separate figure
£29,000Upper bandper tribunalplus £5,000 aggravated
Supporting: email, WhatsApp, text message
Her email raising concerns about a director was a protected act, and she was later removed from the management WhatsApp group.
1601484/2021, England and Wales. Interest: not stated.
Note: total of £3,000 for protected disclosure and victimisation detriments, £15,000 harassment (several parts against different respondents) and £11,000 dismissal; interest stated per part
£24,000Middle bandper tribunal
Mrs S Markwick v The Bevendean Community Pub Ltd
Supporting: WhatsApp, text message
Staff WhatsApp group messages showed her requests for more hours, and her removal from that group was itself one of the discriminatory acts.
2303714/2022, England and Wales. Interest: £4,165.30.
Note: 12% Acas uplift added, giving £26,880; remedy confirmed on reconsideration
£21,000Middle bandper tribunal
JKL v Comfort Care Recruitment and Training Ltd
Supporting: WhatsApp, email
Contemporaneous WhatsApp messages with the director helped fix the dates of the incidents; notice of dismissal was sent by email late at night.
3312293/2022, England and Wales. Interest: £2,582.13.
Note: Assessed at £21,000; a 10% Acas uplift raised it to £23,100 in the judgment.
£20,000Middle bandper tribunal
Ms L A Crabtree v M Bandemer and others
Key evidence: WhatsApp, Teams, email
Much of the sexual harassment by the first respondent, her employer, was conducted through WhatsApp and Teams messages reproduced in the findings.
1402246/2022, England and Wales. Interest: £3,439.55.
Note: no separate personal injury award; medical conditions reflected in the injury to feelings figure
£10,000Middle bandper ProofSnap
Ms F Athif v Mr M J Lallmohamud and Spice E17 Ltd
Supporting: WhatsApp, Instagram, email, text message
WhatsApp messages about her shifts and an Instagram message with photos of her bruises corroborated the claimant's account of the assault.
3205262/2021, England and Wales. Interest: £1,857.12.
Note: two reconsideration applications refused, judgment confirmed
£15,000Middle bandper tribunal
Miss N Chaudhry v Trustmark Plans Ltd
Key evidence: text message, WhatsApp
A text the claimant sent her partner on the day led the tribunal to find that the employer's son had asked her on a date.
3323222/2021, England and Wales. Interest: £2,355.64.
£17,000Middle bandper ProofSnap
A Freke v R Vikal and Emma Victoria Ltd T/a Shapins Clinic
Supporting: WhatsApp
The claimant's WhatsApp message to the owner led the tribunal to find he had repeatedly asked her to be his girlfriend.
3315014/2022, England and Wales. Interest: not stated.
Note: Awarded against both respondents jointly and severally.
£24,000Middle bandper ProofSnap
Miss H Thomas v T&R Direct Insurance Ltd
Supporting: WhatsApp, LinkedIn
Her contemporaneous WhatsApp messages to her partner corroborated the impact of comments at work; a LinkedIn post supported her account of her promotion.
1403175/2022, England and Wales. Interest: £2,304.
£15,000Middle bandper tribunal
Supporting: WhatsApp, text message
Her account was found consistent with contemporaneous WhatsApp messages and a voice note sent to colleagues after the incident.
4102133/2022, Scotland. Interest: not awarded.
£20,000Middle bandper tribunal
D Jacka v Steren Surveyors Ltd and others
Key evidence: WhatsApp, text message
Several of the upheld harassment acts were derogatory, gendered remarks a director posted in the directors' WhatsApp group.
1401228/2022, England and Wales. Interest: £4,744.77.
Note: £15,000 against the first and fourth respondents jointly and £5,000 against the first, third and fourth respondents jointly; a 20% Acas uplift (£4,000) was added in the calculation table.
£9,000Middle bandper tribunalplus £2,250 aggravated
Miss A Tariq v Smart NYD Ltd T/a New York Diner and others
Supporting: text message, WhatsApp, Snapchat, email
Text, WhatsApp and Snapchat messages were used to test credibility, and a respondent's email informed the aggravated damages.
2415146/2019, England and Wales. Interest: not stated.
Note: £9,000 before the aggravated element; total injury to feelings award £11,250 including £2,250 aggravated damages; interest of £4,810.12 was calculated on the whole award, not on injury to feelings alone
£5,000Lower bandper ProofSnap
Mr G Brighty and others v Elevate Staffing Ltd (award 2 of 2)
Supporting: email, WhatsApp
The claimant's same-day email, cross-checked against WhatsApp messages, was accepted as the most contemporaneous account of a colleague's abusive remarks.
3200346/2021 and others, England and Wales. Interest: £960.
Note: Third Claimant (Miss A Fountain)
£4,000Lower bandper ProofSnap
Mr G Brighty and others v Elevate Staffing Ltd (award 1 of 2)
Supporting: email, WhatsApp
The claimant's email to a senior manager the following day was treated as contemporaneous support for his account of the manager's remarks.
3200346/2021 and others, England and Wales. Interest: £768.
Note: second claimant (Mr W Butt); first claimant's claims failed
£29,000Upper bandper tribunalplus £5,000 aggravated
Ms P Mntonintshi and Ms U Jama v Barking Havering and Redbridge University Hospital NHS Trust and Ms C Beck (award 2 of 2)
Key evidence: email, WhatsApp
Emails about an offensive tag on her spreadsheets showed who knew of it, and an inadequate report sent by email was upheld as harassment.
3202401/2020, England and Wales. Interest: £8,016.39.
Note: second claimant; £5,000 of it payable jointly with the second respondent; increased by a 20% Acas uplift to £34,800, on which interest was calculated
£31,000Upper bandper tribunalplus £8,000 aggravated
Ms P Mntonintshi and Ms U Jama v Barking Havering and Redbridge University Hospital NHS Trust and Ms C Beck (award 1 of 2)
Key evidence: email
Her manager emailed a senior manager a probation statement containing false allegations, which was upheld as discrimination and victimisation.
3202401/2020, England and Wales. Interest: £9,539.51.
Note: first claimant; increased by a 20% Acas uplift to £37,200, on which interest was calculated
£24,000Middle bandper tribunal
Mr M Baah v Ballymore Asset Management Ltd
Supporting: email, Facebook
The claimant's grievance emails, one accepted as the protected act, and a residents' Facebook post about him featured in the findings.
3220736/2020, England and Wales. Interest: £5,086.68.
Note: aggravating features and personal injury reflected in this figure, no separate awards
£16,000Middle bandper ProofSnap
Ms A Zaman v Knightsbridge Furnishing Ltd and S Younas
Key evidence: WhatsApp
The director's WhatsApp messages to her, including remarks about her appearance and sexual content, formed the harassment.
4104091/2020, Scotland. Interest: £2,984.
Note: respondents jointly and severally liable
£25,000Middle bandper ProofSnap
Supporting: WhatsApp, text message
The claimant's WhatsApp messages to the managing director reporting homophobic comments, and his replies, are set out in the findings.
4100336/2022, Scotland. Interest: £1,726.02.
Note: confirmed by the later remedy judgment on a financial penalty
£2,000Lower bandper ProofSnap
Mr C Iseki v McColl’s Retail Group Ltd and others
Supporting: text message, WhatsApp, email
Text messages from the area manager and a colleague's email complaint were examined in the findings on the workplace dispute.
3201458/2019, England and Wales. Interest: £578.63.
Note: Ordered against the second respondent; the first respondent was in administration.
£3,000Lower bandper ProofSnap
Mr S Johnstone v Royal Mail Group Ltd
Supporting: WhatsApp, email
WhatsApp exchanges with a supervisor and emails to his manager were used to assess the support the claimant received.
4113754/2021, Scotland. Interest: £145.32.
Note: £3,000 assessed, less 10% for the claimant's failure to comply with the Acas Code
£17,550Middle bandper tribunal
Ms C Anderson v Kelly Marie Ltd T/a Shout Hair and Miss K M McClymont
Key evidence: text message, Facebook
The owner replied to the claimant's sick-day text with a text the tribunal found was intended to dismiss her.
2203932/2020 and 2302061/2021, England and Wales. Interest: £3,254.20.
Note: against both respondents jointly and severally
£22,500Middle bandper tribunal
Mrs J Madeley v Cambrian Group
Supporting: email, text message
The claimant's grievance email was the protected act, and a clearly worded email requesting a reference showed the refusal was victimisation.
1309576/2020, England and Wales. Interest: £3,600.
3. Average injury to feelings award, by band and by type
The median award was £13,000 and the mean £15,112. Half of the awards fell between roughly £5,000 and £24,000 (the lower and upper quartiles).
| Band | Awards | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Lower band | 17 | 36% |
| Middle band | 25 | 53% |
| Upper band | 5 | 11% |
| Above the upper band | 0 | 0% |
| Award | Awards | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Under £5,000 | 8 | 17% |
| £5,000 to £9,999 | 9 | 19% |
| £10,000 to £19,999 | 13 | 28% |
| £20,000 to £29,999 | 13 | 28% |
| £30,000 and over | 4 | 9% |
Average award by type of discrimination
Grouped by the complaint that succeeded, the awards that included a disability or a victimisation complaint had the highest medians, and those for race discrimination sat at the overall median of £13,000.
| Complaint type | Awards | Median award |
|---|---|---|
| Disability | 12 | £24,500£2,000 to £35,200 |
| Victimisation | 16 | £21,750£9,000 to £35,000 |
| Sex | 18 | £17,250£4,000 to £35,000 |
| Age | 4 | £13,500£3,000 to £31,000 |
| Race | 13 | £13,000£2,000 to £35,000 |
In short
Not one award exceeded the upper band, and the largest was £35,200. Where messages were the key evidence, the median award was £16,000; where the messages only supported the account, £11,000.
The lower band covered short episodes, for example one age-related remark to each of two claimants in the Haix decision (£3,000 each). The upper band was reached where several acts were upheld together, such as the race discrimination, harassment and victimisation of two NHS employees in the Barking, Havering and Redbridge decision (£31,000 and £29,000).
4. Aggravated damages, interest and personal injury
- Aggravated damages were awarded in 8 of the 47 awards, from £2,000 to £10,000. The Dowling judgment, for example, states the test as whether the respondent behaved in a high-handed, malicious, insulting or oppressive manner.
- Personal or psychiatric injury was compensated separately in 6 awards. In other decisions the tribunal folded the medical effects into the injury to feelings figure.
- Interest is stated as a sum for 40 awards; in a few that sum also covers aggravated damages or an Acas uplift, as the award notes say. In Dowling v Yo! Sushi, for example, the remedy table adds interest at 8% for 702 days, £1,538.63 on a £10,000 award.
- Uplifts for an unreasonable failure to follow the Acas Code of Practice raised the injury to feelings award in several decisions, by 5% to 25%. The award list shows the sum before any uplift and notes the uplift.
5. What the message evidence was
WhatsApp appeared in the findings of 41 of the 47 awards, email in 27 and text messages in 20. Harassment under section 26 of the Equality Act 2010 is unwanted conduct related to a protected characteristic, or of a sexual nature, that has the purpose or effect of violating a person's dignity or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for them. When that conduct is a message, the message itself records it, with a sender and a time.
| Message type | Awards | Share |
|---|---|---|
| 41 | 87% | |
| 27 | 57% | |
| Text messages (SMS) | 20 | 43% |
| 5 | 11% | |
| 3 | 6% | |
| Snapchat | 2 | 4% |
| 2 | 4% | |
| Microsoft Teams | 2 | 4% |
| Other social media or message boards | 2 | 4% |
In 17 awards the messages were the key evidence. The same patterns recur:
- The harassment was sent as messages. In MacDonald v Alpha Property Management the harassment consisted largely of late-night WhatsApp messages from a director; in Crabtree v Bandemer much of it came through WhatsApp and Teams; in Jacka v Steren Surveyors several of the acts upheld were remarks posted in the directors' WhatsApp group.
- A message resolved a disputed fact. In Chaudhry v Trustmark Plans a text the claimant sent her partner on the day led the tribunal to find what had been said to her.
- The dismissal itself arrived by message. In Anderson v Shout Hair the owner's reply to a sick-day text was found to be a dismissal; in other decisions claimants learned of their dismissal by WhatsApp or by an emailed P45.
- Messages corroborated an account. In Vial v Alsafar the claimant's account matched the WhatsApp messages and a voice note she sent colleagues immediately after the incident. Being removed from a staff WhatsApp group was itself one of the discriminatory acts in at least two decisions.
6. Preserve workplace messages before you lose access
Most of the evidence in these cases sat on systems the employer controls or that the sender can delete: a work Teams or Slack account, a company email inbox, a WhatsApp group run by a manager, a social media post. Once employment ends, access usually goes with it.
Capture the chat while you can still open it
Seal WhatsApp Web, Teams or Outlook on the web in one click from the Chrome side panel. Each capture becomes a signed evidence package with a PDF report, the screenshot, the page code and text and a chain of custody record, and anyone can check it in the free Trust Verifier. 10 captures for $4.99 (approx. £3.72) with no subscription, or the 7-day trial, which requires a payment card.
On a phone? Export the WhatsApp chat and send it to us: within 48 hours you get a certified, line-numbered transcript with an eIDAS qualified timestamp, which anyone can check in the free Trust Verifier. $59.99 (approx. £44.69).
Option 2: API and dashboard
Capture public profiles and posts from the dashboard
For solicitors and advisers: capture a public profile or post once or on a schedule, without a browser, and keep each client's captures together.
50 free test captures in the sandbox, no card needed. Live plans from $1.49 (approx. £1.11) per capture.
See the API and dashboardSix steps that keep the evidence usable
- Keep the whole conversation, not a single bubble. Tribunals read messages in context, with the dates and the replies around them.
- Record who sent what and when. The sender's name or number and the date and time are what tie a message to a person and to the timeline of the claim.
- Report what happened in writing at the time, and keep a copy. A same-day message or email to a partner, a colleague or HR was treated as contemporaneous support in several of the decisions above.
- Capture posts and group chats while they are visible. A post can be edited or deleted and you can be removed from a group.
- Keep the originals. Hold on to the phone and the export alongside any copy, so the source can be checked if authenticity is disputed.
- Note what is held by the employer. Emails and chats on company systems can also be requested from the employer through a data subject access request, as explained by the ICO.
7. Frequently asked questions
What are the current Vento bands for 2026?
For claims presented on or after 6 April 2026, the bands are £1,300 to £12,600 (lower), £12,600 to £37,700 (middle) and £37,700 to £62,900 (upper), and the most exceptional cases can exceed £62,900. Claims presented from 6 April 2025 to 5 April 2026 use the 2025 bands: £1,200 to £12,100, £12,100 to £36,400 and £36,400 to £60,700.
How do tribunals decide which Vento band applies?
The band figures are set by the date on which the claim form was presented to the tribunal, not by the date of the treatment or of the hearing. Where in the bands an award lands depends on how serious the treatment was and how it affected the claimant.
How much compensation do you get for injury to feelings?
In the 47 awards ProofSnap collected from 44 decisions published between 2022 and 2026, all with messages in evidence, the median award was £13,000 and the mean £15,112. Half the awards were between roughly £5,000 and £24,000, and they ranged from £2,000 to £35,200.
How do you prove injury to feelings?
With evidence of how the treatment affected you: in Dowling v Yo! Sushi the tribunal noted that the claimant had undertaken talking therapies, had ongoing problems with sleep and anxiety and had started anti-depressants, and awarded £10,000. Messages sent at the time can show the effect too: in Thomas v T&R Direct Insurance the claimant's WhatsApp messages to her partner corroborated the impact of comments at work.
Are aggravated damages added on top of injury to feelings?
They can be: in 8 of the 47 awards the tribunal also ordered aggravated damages, from £2,000 to £10,000. Six awards included a separate sum for personal or psychiatric injury, and the judgments stated an interest figure for 40 awards.
What is the average award for disability discrimination?
In our dataset, the 12 awards where a disability complaint succeeded had a median injury to feelings award of £24,500 and ranged from £2,000 to £35,200. Lost earnings and interest are separate amounts on top.
How much does it cost to preserve messages with ProofSnap?
A SnapPack of 10 captures costs $4.99 (approx. £3.72) with no subscription, and the 7-day trial requires a payment card. An eIDAS qualified timestamp costs $4.99 (approx. £3.72) for one capture or $24.99 (approx. £18.62) for ten. A WhatsApp chat certified by ProofSnap from your export costs $59.99 (approx. £44.69) and is delivered in 48 hours.
8. Methodology and data
Bands. The band figures were copied from the text of the Presidential Guidance of 5 September 2017 (paragraph 10) and its First to Ninth Addenda (paragraph 2 of each), as published on the judiciary website and read on 10 November 2026.
Decisions. On 10 November 2026 we searched the GOV.UK employment tribunal decisions database for decisions published from 2022 onwards, combining injury to feelings with WhatsApp, text messages, Teams, Slack, email and social media, and read the judgment PDFs. A decision was included when an Equality Act complaint succeeded, the latest judgment on the file awarded a specific sum for injury to feelings and the findings referred to specific messages; consent judgments, awards later set aside and awards not separated from personal injury were left out. Each date is the decision date GOV.UK lists for the file, and an automated check confirmed every quoted figure against the judgment text.
Definitions. The award shown is the tribunal's assessment before any Acas uplift or reduction, which the notes mention. Where a judgment awarded injury to feelings for several acts or against several respondents, the figure is the total for the claimant; in two decisions that total includes a smaller sum for a combined protected disclosure and victimisation detriment, noted in the row. Messages are the key evidence when the unlawful conduct itself was in the messages or the tribunal said a message resolved a disputed fact; otherwise they are supporting. The tribunal itself named the band in 32 of the 47 awards; for the rest we measured the sum against the bands in force for the claim, using the presentation date where the judgment gives it and otherwise the year in the case number, and assigned a band only where both possible periods give the same one. An award exactly on a band boundary counts in the lower of the two bands unless the tribunal said otherwise. The discrimination type in the award filter is taken from the successful complaints recorded for each award; an award can have several types, and victimisation is listed as its own type.
Limits. GOV.UK publishes judgments, not settlements, and many claims settle before a hearing. The dataset only covers successful claims with message evidence and published reasons, so it describes what tribunals award in such cases, not the outcome of an average claim. The search is not exhaustive: other qualifying decisions exist that our queries did not surface. Prices for ProofSnap are converted at the European Central Bank reference rates of 10 November 2026 (US$1 = £0.7450).
Data. The CSV file with all 47 awards (case, case number, tribunal, decision date, link, award, paragraph, band and how it was assigned, aggravated damages, interest, personal injury, message types, role and summary) and the band table is published under the CC BY 4.0 licence. Please cite "ProofSnap, Vento bands and injury to feelings awards 2026" with a link to this page.
Before you lose access
Keep the messages that show what happened and how it affected you
One click in the Chrome side panel seals the chat you have open into a signed evidence package that anyone can check in the free Trust Verifier. 10 captures for $4.99 (approx. £3.72) with no subscription, or the 7-day trial, which requires a payment card.
Export the WhatsApp chat on your phone and send it to us: a certified, line-numbered transcript with an eIDAS qualified timestamp comes back within 48 hours, for $59.99 (approx. £44.69).
Certify a WhatsApp chat Solicitors and advisers: see the API and dashboardFurther reading
Sources
- Courts and Tribunals Judiciary: Presidential Guidance, Employment Tribunal awards for injury to feelings and psychiatric injury following De Souza v Vinci Construction (UK) Ltd [2017] EWCA Civ 879, 5 September 2017
- Courts and Tribunals Judiciary: First Addendum to the Presidential Guidance, 23 March 2018, claims presented on or after 6 April 2018
- Courts and Tribunals Judiciary: Second Addendum to the Presidential Guidance, 25 March 2019, claims presented on or after 6 April 2019
- Courts and Tribunals Judiciary: Third Addendum to the Presidential Guidance, 27 March 2020, claims presented on or after 6 April 2020
- Courts and Tribunals Judiciary: Fourth Addendum to the Presidential Guidance, 26 March 2021, claims presented on or after 6 April 2021
- Courts and Tribunals Judiciary: Fifth Addendum to the Presidential Guidance, 28 March 2022, claims presented on or after 6 April 2022
- Courts and Tribunals Judiciary: Sixth Addendum to the Presidential Guidance, 24 March 2023, claims presented on or after 6 April 2023
- Courts and Tribunals Judiciary: Seventh Addendum to the Presidential Guidance, 25 March 2024, claims presented on or after 6 April 2024
- Courts and Tribunals Judiciary: Eighth Addendum to the Presidential Guidance, 27 March 2025, claims presented on or after 6 April 2025
- Courts and Tribunals Judiciary: Ninth Addendum to the Presidential Guidance, 30 March 2026, claims presented on or after 6 April 2026
- Equality Act 2010, section 26 (harassment), legislation.gov.uk
- Equality Act 2010, section 119 (remedies), legislation.gov.uk
- GOV.UK: Employment tribunal decisions; the 44 decisions are linked from the award list and listed in the CSV file.
- European Central Bank: euro foreign exchange reference rates, 10 November 2026