Case 3311181/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Robert Ainsworth v Take Me Home James Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 3311181/2023
- Decision date
- 10 February 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Taft REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Robert Ainsworth
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Taft, sitting alone at Reading on 10 January 2025, considered four alleged unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and a complaint that no itemised pay statement was provided for June 2023. The judge found that the contract of employment did not authorise deductions for vehicle damage, that the separate "subcontract" was not incorporated into the contract, and that the claimant had not previously consented in writing to any such deduction.
The £550 deduction on 31 May 2023 and the non-payment of £346.16 for work performed between 1-3 June 2023 were therefore unauthorised deductions and the complaints were well-founded. The complaints relating to £576.92 (15-21 May 2023) and £1,153.38 (5-15 June 2023) were not well-founded because the claimant had not adduced evidence of sickness and was not entitled to be paid for periods he was unable to work, with no entitlement to Statutory Sick Pay established (in particular no fit note for the period exceeding seven days).
The complaint regarding the itemised pay statement for June 2023 was well-founded, the tribunal finding as a fact that the payslip was not sent at the relevant time but only produced during proceedings. The tribunal confirmed the particulars in the later payslip were correct and concluded it was not just and equitable to award further compensation. The respondent was ordered to pay the claimant £896.16 gross.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unauthorised deduction of £550 on 31 May 2023 in respect of vehicle damage; no contractual authorisation and no prior written consent. | Upheld | — | £550 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Complaint in respect of £576.92 for the period 15-21 May 2023 not well-founded; tribunal not satisfied claimant was entitled to pay (no evidence of sickness, no SSP entitlement). | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unauthorised deduction of £346.16 for the period 1-3 June 2023 (days worked but not paid); no contractual or written authorisation for deduction. | Upheld | — | £346 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Complaint in respect of £1,153.38 for the period 5-15 June 2023 not well-founded; no evidence of sickness or fit note, so no entitlement to pay. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | Failure to provide an itemised pay statement for June 2023 (s.8 ERA 1996) well-founded; tribunal confirmed the correct particulars and found it not just and equitable to award further compensation. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £896
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
5 references- s.8 Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.11 Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.13 Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.23 Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.24 Employment Rights Act 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.