Case 1600349/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Yvonne Wintle v Breaksea Residential Homes Limited — 2018
- Case reference
- 1600349/2018
- Decision date
- 16 August 2018
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Howden-Evans Representation
- Venue
- Cardiff
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Yvonne Wintle
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs Yvonne Wintle brought a claim against Breaksea Residential Homes Limited for unpaid wages following unlawful deductions. The employment judge heard evidence from Ms Wintle and Mr Rossini, considered statements from Ms Corry and Ms James, and had regard to a 31-page bundle of documents.
The tribunal held that the claimant's claim for unlawful deductions from wages was well-founded and ordered the respondent to pay £446.25 to the claimant. The judgment does not split the award into separate heads of loss.
The judge stated that reasons were given orally at the hearing on 3 August 2018, and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days. The judgment also provided that if the debt was not paid within 14 days, interest would accrue at 8% per annum on any unpaid amount in accordance with Article 3(1) of the Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the claimant's claim for unpaid wages following unlawful deductions was well-founded. | Upheld | — | £446 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £446
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Article 3(1) Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.