Case 2501011/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr W Eisler v Collect Your Rent Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 2501011/2019
- Decision date
- 30 July 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Martin
- Venue
- Newcastle
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr W Eisler
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Martin, sitting alone, heard the case at Newcastle on 15 July 2019. The tribunal upheld the claimant's complaint of unlawful deduction from wages. It found that the complaint related to the claimant's last four weeks' pay and to deductions from wages for January and February in the sum of £416.60, the latter being part of a continuing unlawful deduction from wages.
For that claim, the respondent was ordered to pay the claimant the gross sum of £2,661.21. The tribunal also upheld the claimant's complaint of breach of contract, which was based on the failure to pay notice pay. It ordered the respondent to pay compensation for breach of contract at the rate of one week's gross pay, assessed at £561.15.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal held that the complaint was well founded. It related to the claimant's last four weeks' pay and deductions from wages for January and February, with the latter described as part of a continuing unlawful deduction from wages. The respondent was ordered to pay the gross sum of £2,661.21. | Upheld | — | £2,661 |
| Breach of contract | The breach of contract claim was for failure to pay notice pay. The tribunal found it well founded and ordered compensation at the rate of one week's gross pay, being £561.15. | Upheld | — | £561 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,222
- across all upheld claims
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.