Case 6009542/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Abigail Obenewaah Asiedu v Hamberley Care FV (Eastleigh) Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6009542/2025
- Decision date
- 21 November 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Elizabeth Gibson
- Venue
- By Cloud Virtual Platform
Parties
2 namedAbigail Obenewaah Asiedu
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, a care assistant employed under the Skilled Worker visa route by Hamberley Care FV (Eastleigh) Limited from June 2023 until her resignation in February 2025, brought a claim for unauthorised deductions from wages totalling £2,861.83 made from her January and February 2025 salaries. Her employment had been preceded by a Conditional Offer Letter and a Final Offer Letter, both of which she had signed and which provided that sponsorship-related costs would be repayable if she left employment within three years.
The Tribunal found that the claimant's signature on those letters constituted prior written agreement to deductions under section 13(1)(b) Employment Rights Act 1996, but that the agreement did not extend to the full £2,861.83 the respondent ultimately deducted. Two specific elements of the respondent's breakdown were not within the scope of what the claimant had agreed to: £113.83 of 'induction logistics' costs (which the Tribunal found were more likely already reflected in the £300 airport-pickup line) and a £500 blanket 'agency fee' for which the respondent did not provide convincing justification. The respondent was ordered to pay the claimant £613.83 in respect of those unlawful deductions; the claimant is responsible for the payment of tax or National Insurance.
Claims and outcomes
1 claim adjudicated| Claim type | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Upheld | — | £614 |
Legal tests applied
4 referencesRemedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £614
- Compensatory award
- £614
Source document
Primary recordThe full judgment is available 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.