Case 1601283/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr L Reid v Crime Scene Cleaning UK Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 1601283/2022
- Decision date
- 16 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge T. Vincent Ryan
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr L Reid
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr L Reid, was employed by Crime Scene Cleaning UK Ltd as a cleaner from 7 December 2021 until 8 September 2022. He did not attend or participate at the hearing. The tribunal accepted the evidence of Mr Collins, the respondent's Commercial Director, as plausible and reliable, and noted that he had only recently become aware of the litigation after the company's purchase at the end of February 2023.
The claimant had failed to comply with case management orders requiring him to set out the basis of his claims and provide a calculation of the sums claimed. The tribunal recorded that the claimant had alleged he was "underpaid multiple times" and was not paid for trips to help other employees or to pick up stock, but he produced no evidence to support those assertions.
Applying section 13 Employment Rights Act 1996, the tribunal found that the claimant had not proved that the respondent made any unauthorised deductions from wages. It also found that he had not proved any contractually recoverable expenses, any breach of contract concerning payment of expenses, or any loss arising from the employment. The respondent's payment records showed, in Mr Collins' evidence, that the claimant had been paid all monies due to him.
The judgment therefore dismissed both the unauthorised deductions from wages claim and the breach of contract claim as not well-founded.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.13 Employment Rights Act 1996
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.