Mr J Kubisa v Pro Driven (Barnsley) Limited — 2022

The Claimant worked for the Respondent haulage company as an HGV Class 1 driver for 9 full days in March and April 2022. The Respondent withheld his wages for that period after two incidents in which it said he caused damage to the truck and trailer. The parties agreed the wages otherwise due for the period, including night allowance, were £1,385. The Tribunal heard oral evidence from both sides, saw video footage of the incidents, and considered the Respondent's written accident reporting procedure, which included a clause saying a driver would, if proven, be liable for the insurance excess or repair cost and that amount would be deducted from wages.

On the first incident, the Tribunal found the Claimant did not take reasonable care when carrying out the pre-drive checks on the truck and trailer coupling. It accepted that he had been required to check the unit/trailer coupling security and perform a tug test, but found his inspection was cursory and that he had not in fact carried out the tug test even though he recorded that he had. When he drove off, the trailer uncoupled and the front of it fell to the ground, causing damage to the electrical suzzies, battery cover, battery box, mega fuse, batteries and external metal stanchion. On the second incident, the Tribunal found that the Claimant collided with an object while driving onto a customer weighbridge and then continued forward. It held that he had not exercised reasonable skill and care and accepted damage to a wheel, wheel hub, mudguard and fuel tank.

The Tribunal accepted that both incidents fell within the accident reporting procedure's definition of traffic accident or third party property damage, but it held that the deduction clause was not clear enough to authorise the deduction from wages. In particular, it said the clause did not make clear what had to be proved, or to whom, before liability arose. The claim for unauthorised deduction from wages therefore succeeded and the Respondent was ordered to pay £1,385, subject to lawful deductions. The Claimant's separate phone allowance claim was withdrawn and dismissed. The Respondent's employer's contract claim succeeded because the Claimant had breached the implied contractual duty to exercise reasonable skill and care, and damages of £2,135.68 were awarded by reference to the repair invoices, including replacement of the fuel tank.