Case 6016508/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Shahrul Masud v Pinnacle Finance Mortgage Adviser and Specialist Lending Brokers — 2025
- Case reference
- 6016508/2024
- Decision date
- 18 July 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Freshwater Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Shahrul Masud
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningShahrul Masud worked as a specialist mortgage broker from 1 November 2023 until he resigned on 23 October 2024. The tribunal found that he accepted the respondent's offer email of 6 October 2023 and was given a copy of his contract on induction day. It accepted the respondent's evidence that commission was described in the contract as a benefit and could be amended or withdrawn.
The tribunal recorded that on 24 July 2024 the respondent was told that a mortgage application submitted by the claimant had been said to be fraudulent, which led to an investigation by the mortgage club and a suspension of the respondent's ability to claim commission. Mr Sparkes told the claimant on 29 July 2024 that, because of the cash flow consequences of that investigation, the respondent would not be able to pay his salary. The tribunal found that Mr Masud was not paid in July, August, September or October 2024.
The complaint of unlawful deduction from wages succeeded. The respondent accepted that £7,221.69 net was owed for the unpaid salary for July to October 2024, and the reasons state that this amount included the 'Bonus' entry shown on the July 2024 payslip. The tribunal also said the successful complaint covered the July 2024 commission element, but it identified no separate quantified sum for commission beyond the accepted net amount.
The holiday pay claim failed. The tribunal said there was no evidence from the claimant about the amount of holiday pay said to be outstanding, no record of when annual leave had been taken, and no basis on which it could be satisfied that holiday pay remained unpaid.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal accepted Mr Sparkes' evidence that £7,221.69 net was owed for unpaid July to October 2024 salary, and the reasons also state that the successful complaint included July 2024 commission/bonus, although no separate figure was identified for that element. | Upheld | — | £7,222 |
| Holiday pay | The claimant had no record of annual leave taken and provided no evidence of the amount said to be outstanding; the tribunal was not satisfied that holiday pay had not been paid. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £7,222
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.13 ERA 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.