Cases3311181/2023

Claimant v Take Me Home James Limited

3 February 2025Before Employment Judge Louise TaftReadingin person

Outcome

Partly successful£896

Individual claims

Unlawful Deduction from Wagessucceeded

The tribunal found that the £550 deduction on 31 May 2023 for vehicle damage was unauthorised because the subcontract permitting such deductions was not incorporated into the claimant's contract of employment, and there was no prior written agreement to the deduction as required by ERA 1996 s.13.

Unlawful Deduction from Wagesfailed

The tribunal found that the claimant was not entitled to pay for 15-21 May 2023 because he was unable to work and produced no evidence of sickness entitling him to Statutory Sick Pay. Therefore there was no unlawful deduction as no wages were properly payable.

Unlawful Deduction from Wagessucceeded

The tribunal found that the claimant worked during 1-3 June 2023 and was entitled to be paid £346.16. The respondent's deduction was unauthorised as there was no prior written agreement for the deduction (whether for alcohol-related absence or vehicle damage) and it was not authorised by the contract of employment.

Unlawful Deduction from Wagesfailed

The tribunal found that the claimant was not entitled to pay for 5-15 June 2023 because he was unable to work due to alcohol abuse (not sickness) and produced no fit note entitling him to Statutory Sick Pay. Therefore there was no unlawful deduction as no wages were properly payable.

Othersucceeded

The tribunal found that the respondent failed to provide an itemised pay statement for June 2023 at the relevant time as required by ERA 1996 s.8, though it was later provided during tribunal proceedings. No additional compensation was awarded as it was not just and equitable given the payslip was ultimately provided and showed the correct particulars.

Facts

The claimant worked for a private hire company and claimed four unauthorised deductions from wages. The first (£550) and fourth (£346.16) deductions related to vehicle damage. The respondent relied on a 'subcontract' between the director's wife (vehicle owner) and the company, but the tribunal found this was not incorporated into the claimant's employment contract. The second and third claims related to periods when the claimant did not work (15-21 May and 5-15 June 2023), allegedly due to a head injury and alcohol abuse. The claimant also claimed he did not receive a June 2023 payslip until tribunal proceedings commenced.

Decision

The tribunal found that two deductions (£550 and £346.16) were unauthorised because there was no prior written agreement permitting deductions for vehicle damage as required by ERA 1996 s.13. The claims for the two periods of non-work failed because the claimant was not entitled to pay (not being sick and providing no fit note for SSP). The failure to provide a payslip claim succeeded but no additional compensation was awarded as the correct payslip was ultimately provided during proceedings.

Practical note

Employers cannot make deductions from wages for damage or other losses unless there is clear prior written agreement in a contractual document actually provided to the worker before the deduction is made—verbal agreements or documents not incorporated into the contract are insufficient.

Award breakdown

Unpaid wages£896

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

ERA 1996 s.23ERA 1996 s.8ERA 1996 s.24ERA 1996 s.11ERA 1996 s.13

Case details

Case number
3311181/2023
Decision date
3 February 2025
Hearing type
full merits
Hearing days
1
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
transport
Represented
No
Rep type
in house

Claimant representation

Represented
No