Was this a legal redundancy?

My ex-employer called me in an office and just said "With immediate effect I am making you redundant as we can't afford it, you can leave now and will be paid time in lieu", and 3 weeks redundancy pay would be given. That was on the 27th October this year, with no consultation or letter stating this fact. On the 3rd November I received my usual salary but no redundancy. ( I was employed on the 17th November 2009, but with the months in lieu of notice I understand it would have been two years employment anyway). I emailed the company and they said it would be paid at the end of November. Can this be correct or legal? When I did receive the payment he had deducted tax from the redundancy part and had paid no commission. I contacted them again and the tax part was rectified within 7 days, but no commission payment.
To this day I have had no breakdown by letter how the redundancy has been paid, I was making money for the company and he is now doing my job as well as his own for the forseeable future.
Can I claim compensation for wrongful dismal, commission owed etc.
I look forward to your reply.

For a redundancy to be genuine there has to be a diminishing need for work of the type you are doing. Businesses can simply decide not to do such work it doesn't have to be a sensible decision. So if your work has been taken over by an existing employee that suggests the redundancy was genuine.

As far as the commission is concerned if this was contractual and you can show/evidence exactly how much you earned and what was due then you can claim this via a tribunal, but you should submit a grievance first and exhaust the employer's own procedures (while not forgetting to submit any tribunal claim within three months of the non-receipt of the payment, whether or not the grievance is resolved).

The only other issue is the lack of consultation, and in a small business, if the employer can show that such consultation would have been pointless, then all other things being equal they will probably get away with that.

Thank you for the reply.However,I was employed as the General Sales Manager for the company, and all external sales people, all telesales people, counter/customer services staff and telesales staff have been kept on. In fact 2 more people were employed to help with Customer Services, and an additional Telesales staff member was appointed after me leaving, so apart from my boss (the M.D.) doing some of my role, in fact the staff headcount has increased, and as I said earlier I was growing the company, 25% first year, and 12% for the first half of this fiscal year, so in fact it seems to me the company was growing. I think this was more personal but cannot prove anything. With this information does it improve my case to pursue an employment tribunial, apart from the commisssion side?

No, it simply confirms that there was a genuine redundancy.

Like I said, tribunals will not judge how sensible a business decision is, they are only interested in the fact that a decision has been made, so the fact that you are accepting that your role was spread around a number of others, including new staff at a lower level, merely serves to show that the redundancy situation was genuine, however illogical you may consider the decision to have been.