Case 3205435/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Crossley v TCH Housing Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 3205435/2022
- Decision date
- 9 April 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Norris
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Crossley
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Norris sat alone at East London Hearing Centre by CVP on 6 April 2023. The respondent did not appear and was not represented. The tribunal held that Mr J Crossley's claims for holiday pay, unlawful deductions from wages, failure to provide a statement of terms and conditions under section 1 ERA 1996, and breach of contract for notice pay were all well founded and succeeded.
The tribunal ordered gross sums of £2,169.03 for holiday pay, £2,960.28 for unlawful deductions from wages, £2,284.00 for failure to provide the section 1 statement, and £2,500.00 for notice pay. It also found that the claimant had sustained financial loss attributable to the unlawful deductions and awarded an additional £500 under section 24(2) ERA 1996 towards that loss.
In relation to the failure to provide the statement of terms and conditions, the tribunal said it was just and equitable to make an award in the higher amount, being four weeks' pay, under section 38(4)(b) Employment Act 2002. The judgment records a total sum of £10,413.31.
The tribunal stated that the respondent could satisfy the holiday pay, unlawful deductions and notice pay awards by paying the net sums due and accounting to HMRC for tax and national insurance on those amounts, and that no other deduction was to be made from the awards set out in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £2,169 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal ordered £2,960.28 for unlawful deductions from wages and an additional £500 under section 24(2) ERA 1996 towards financial loss attributable to those deductions. | Upheld | — | £3,460 |
| Other | Failure to provide a statement of terms and conditions under section 1 ERA 1996; the tribunal said it was just and equitable to award the higher amount of four weeks' pay under section 38(4)(b) Employment Act 2002. | Upheld | — | £2,284 |
| Breach of contract | Notice pay. | Upheld | — | £2,500 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £10,413
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
3 references- s.1 ERA 1996
- s.24(2) ERA 1996
- s.38(4)(b) Employment Act 2002
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.