Case 3314499/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Megan Lanham v Ms Mandy Rimmer t/a Highgrade House Skin Clinic — 2021
- Case reference
- 3314499/2020
- Decision date
- 25 August 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Alliott
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Megan Lanham
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs Megan Lanham was employed by Ms Mandy Rimmer t/a Highgrade House Skin Clinic from 14 July 2020 as a beauty therapist, working 20 hours per week at £6.50 per hour. She resigned on 19 October 2020. Her final wageslip showed deductions including income tax, national insurance, course fees of £240, and £65 for notice not worked, leaving her paid £18.43. The tribunal identified the issue as whether those deductions were authorised under section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
The tribunal accepted that the respondent had given the claimant a written contract shortly after she started work, before the deductions were made. It found that the contract contained a clause requiring repayment of training funded by Highgrade House if the employee left within the first year of the training. Although the claimant said she had not read the whole contract and had not signed it, the tribunal found that she had been given a copy and had the opportunity to read it; it also found that she had identified an error in the holiday entitlement section and that the contract had been corrected and put on file.
On that basis, the tribunal held that the £240 training-fee deduction was authorised by the contractual term and formed part of the claimant's contract of employment. It also found that the claimant's continuation in employment for three months affirmed the written terms. The claim for £240 therefore failed.
The tribunal did accept that the £65 deduction for notice not worked should not have been made, because the daily rate was £32.50. Judgment was entered for the claimant in the net sum of £32.50 only.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal upheld the claim to the extent of the £65 deduction for notice not worked, but found the £240 training-fee deduction was authorised by the contractual term and failed. | Upheld | — | £33 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £33
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.13 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.