Case 6019644/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Saunders v Heronsmere Homecare Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6019644/2024
- Decision date
- 12 August 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge George
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Saunders
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was presented in the South East Employment Tribunal on 28 November 2024. The respondent did not present a valid response on time, so the Employment Judge decided that a determination could properly be made under rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure. The judgment records that the claimant was Mr S Saunders and the respondent was Heronsmere Homecare Limited.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant’s wages. It ordered the respondent to pay £6,170.83 gross in respect of that claim.
The tribunal also found that the respondent was in breach of contract because it had failed to pay mileage expenses incurred by the claimant while carrying out his employment. It ordered payment of £240.00 in damages for breach of contract. The total award was £6,410.83.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The respondent failed to present a valid response on time. The tribunal determined under rule 22 and found unauthorised deductions from wages, ordering payment of £6,170.83 gross. | Upheld | — | £6,171 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the respondent was in breach of contract for failing to pay mileage expenses incurred by the claimant in the course of employment and awarded £240.00 in damages. | Upheld | — | £240 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £6,411
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure
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.