Case 3200169/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Footman v Beyond Limits Coach Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 3200169/2024
- Decision date
- 9 May 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Representation For
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Footman
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs Footman’s claims against Beyond Limits Coach Ltd were heard on 9 May 2024 at East London Hearing Centre by CVP. The respondent did not attend the hearing and had not entered a response to the claim, although written submissions emailed on 28 April 2024 were considered by the tribunal.
Tribunal Judge R Overton found both claims well-founded. The tribunal upheld a claim for unauthorised deduction from wages and a separate claim for accrued, untaken holiday pay on termination under regulation 14 of the Working Time Regulations 1998.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £618.75 gross, payable to the claimant net subject to statutory deductions of tax and national insurance as applicable. That sum comprised £131.25 for 10.5 hours at £12.50 per hour and £487.75 for 39.02 hours of accrued annual leave at £12.50 per hour.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the claim for unauthorised deduction from wages well-founded and included £131.25 in the overall award, calculated as 10.5 hours x £12.50 per hour gross. | Upheld | — | £131 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the claim for accrued, untaken holiday pay on termination under reg. 14 Working Time Regulations 1998 well-founded and included £487.75 in the overall award, calculated as 39.02 hours x £12.50 per hour gross. | Upheld | — | £488 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £619
- 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.