Case 6004755/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Platinum Housing Support and Care Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6004755/2024
- Decision date
- 1 April 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge D Wright
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting alone before Employment Judge D Wright on 14 March 2025, found that the claimant, Ms Lauren Giles, had suffered unauthorised deductions from wages. The judgment states that the deductions fell due in May and June 2023 and that the complaint was well-founded.
The tribunal ordered the respondent, Platinum Housing Support and Care Ltd, to pay £4,183.34, described as the gross sum deducted. It further ordered payment of £334.66 under section 24(2) Employment Rights Act 1996 to reflect interest charged to the claimant using credit and loan facilities to cover the shortfall in wages.
The total sum due to the claimant was recorded as £4,518. The written record notes that reasons had been given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found an unauthorised deduction from wages for May and June 2023. It also awarded a further statutory sum for interest caused by the shortfall. | Upheld | — | £4,183 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,518
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 24(2) 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.