Case 3313262/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Jessica Clad v Finance Giant Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 3313262/2020
- Decision date
- 8 July 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dick Representation
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Jessica Clad
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing on 20 June 2022 in Watford, the Employment Tribunal recorded that the Respondent did not attend but had requested that the hearing proceed in its absence. The Tribunal amended the Respondent's name to Finance Giant Ltd (trading as Car Finance Giant) and determined the Claimant's unlawful deduction from wages claim in her favour.
The Tribunal found that the Respondent had made an unlawful deduction from the Claimant's wages. It ordered the Respondent to pay the net sum of £5,248.98, made up of the £5,189.33 deducted and £59.65 in banking charges incurred by the Claimant and attributable to the deductions. The decision also stated that the Respondent would be responsible for any tax and/or national insurance contributions due on the payment.
The Respondent's counter-claim was dismissed. The Tribunal said it had no jurisdiction to hear that counter-claim because the original claim had not been made under the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994/1623.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The Tribunal found the Respondent made an unlawful deduction from wages and ordered payment of the net sum of £5,248.98, comprising £5,189.33 deducted plus £59.65 banking charges attributable to the deductions. The Respondent was also to be responsible for any tax and/or national insurance contributions due on the payment. | Upheld | — | £5,249 |
| Other | The Respondent's counter-claim was dismissed because the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear it, the original claim not having been made under the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994/1623. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,249
- 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.