Mr M Hodgson v Lyndon-Dykes Ltd — 2020

The tribunal found that Mr Hodgson was entitled to a salary of £25,000 per annum. It relied on the employment terms document at page 37, the signed contract documents, the claimant's evidence, and payslips showing an increase from August 2018. On that basis, and using the contractual holiday entitlement, it found that he had 7.3 days of accrued untaken holiday as at the termination date of 28 April 2019 and awarded £701.89 gross for holiday pay.

The respondent advanced a number of reasons for withholding final pay, including alleged overpayment, HIT training costs, missing items, alleged theft, payments to Matthew Hodgson and Laura Wheatley, till shortages, and expenses charged on company bank cards. The tribunal rejected the allegations of theft and missing property, found no basis for deductions relating to the respondent's alleged losses, accepted that the photography invoices to Matthew Hodgson were paid and not shown to be free services, and held that the Laura Wheatley payments and bank-card items did not justify deductions from wages. The only deduction the claimant accepted as lawful was £212 for HIT training costs.

The tribunal therefore upheld the unlawful deductions claim and ordered payment of £2,950.67 gross for unpaid salary/car allowance. It also found that payslips had not been provided, applied sections 8, 12(4) and 26 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, and awarded £212 net for the itemised pay statement claim. The tribunal noted that expenses were excluded from the definition of wages under section 27(2)(b) ERA 1996 and declined to make an order for that element.