In person For the v Respondent — 2024

The claimant worked for the respondent first from 12 April 2023 and again from 18 July 2023 as an HGV driver. The tribunal found that no new contract had been issued for the second engagement, that the claimant was employed on the increased hourly rate of £14.50, and that he remained on the terms of the 12 April 2023 contract, including a one-week notice period and contractual authority for deductions in respect of PCNs paid by the respondent.

The claimant's missing-hours allegation was not pursued in evidence, and the tribunal noted that a complaint on that topic had already been raised and addressed during the earlier period of employment. For the first PCN, issued on 3 August 2023 for a contravention on 29 July 2023, the respondent had paid the charge and deducted £60 from wages on 25 August 2023. The tribunal held that deduction was authorised by the contract and dismissed the unlawful deduction from wages claim.

On holiday pay, the tribunal accepted that the correct termination date was 26 November 2023, not 2 November 2023. It found the claimant had taken and been paid for 5.8 days of leave, that he was entitled to 28 days a year, and that using the respondent's calculator on the correct termination date produced accrued holiday of 7.07 days. The tribunal therefore found 1.27 days remained unpaid and calculated the gross amount due as £220.98, which it ordered the respondent to pay within 14 days.

The claim that the respondent should reimburse the second PCN, issued on 15 August 2023 and not paid by either side, was dismissed. The tribunal found there was nothing in the contract requiring the respondent to pay that charge when it arose, and the evidence was insufficient to establish a usual course of conduct giving rise to an obligation to reimburse it. The tribunal also noted that issues about notice and alleged vehicle damage did not affect the claims it had to decide, because no deduction was made for those matters and no counterclaim was brought.