Claimant v Richard Moore t/a Escape Hairdressers
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal determined under section 163 Employment Rights Act 1996 that the claimant was entitled to a redundancy payment. The respondent did not attend to contest the claim.
The tribunal found the complaint well founded that the respondent made an unlawful deduction from wages by failing to pay wages due for work done in August 2024. The respondent did not attend to defend the claim.
The tribunal found the complaint well founded that the respondent made an unlawful deduction from wages by failing to make a payment for accrued untaken holiday on termination of employment in August 2024.
Facts
The claimant worked as a hairdresser for the respondent, Richard Moore trading as Escape Hairdressers. Her employment terminated in August 2024. She claimed she was owed redundancy pay, unpaid wages for work done in August 2024, and accrued untaken holiday pay. The respondent failed to attend the hearing.
Decision
The tribunal found all three claims well founded. The claimant was awarded £3,151.72 in redundancy pay, £434.72 for unpaid wages, and £217.36 for holiday pay, totaling £3,803.80. The respondent's non-attendance meant the claims were uncontested.
Practical note
Where a respondent fails to attend a hearing, the tribunal can proceed and make awards in the claimant's favor based on uncontested evidence, particularly in straightforward monetary claims.
Award breakdown
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6018068/2024
- Decision date
- 9 January 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- retail
- Represented
- No
Employment details
- Role
- Hairdresser
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No