Case 1804982/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v PGM Caravan Services Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 1804982/2020
- Decision date
- 30 October 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the video hearing on 30 October 2020 before Employment Judge R S Drake, the tribunal dealt with a claim framed under section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 for unpaid wages and holiday pay. The respondent had not filed documents and did not provide sworn testimony from a company officer, so the tribunal relied mainly on the claimant's oral evidence and the limited evidence given by the respondent's HR manager.
The tribunal found that furlough had ended before the claimant returned to work on or about 20 June 2020, and that he then worked 69.5 hours between 20 and 26 June 2020 at a net rate of £9 per hour. It also accepted his evidence that he had accrued 13.7 days' holiday in 2020 at a net rate of £72 per day; the respondent's lower figure of 11.5 days was not supported by evidence.
The tribunal found that the claimant's gross entitlement for unpaid wages and holiday pay was £1,611.90. It required credit for £1,096.34 that the claimant accepted he had received on termination, leaving £515.56 due. Judgment was entered for that sum, to the extent of which the claim succeeded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claim was brought under section 13 ERA 1996 and covered unpaid wages for 69.5 hours worked after furlough ended, together with 13.7 days' holiday pay. The tribunal awarded the net balance after crediting £1,096.34 already received on termination. | Upheld | — | £516 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £516
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.13 ERA 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.