Case 6019855/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Kion Poursaheli v Ingrid Kraftchenko Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6019855/2024
- Decision date
- 1 May 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge E Searley Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Kion Poursaheli
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge E Searley, sitting alone at East London Hearing Centre via CVP on 1 May 2025, found that the claimant's complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages was well-founded. The respondent did not attend and the claimant was unrepresented. The tribunal found that the respondent made a series of unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages between 3 September 2024 and 31 October 2024.
The respondent was ordered to pay the claimant £1,528.20, being the gross sum deducted, with the claimant responsible for any tax and national insurance. The calculation in Appendix 1 set out a rate of pay of £12 per hour, with August totalling 86 hours and 6 minutes (£1,033.20) and September totalling 41 hours and 15 minutes (£495.00).
Written reasons were not provided as reasons had been given orally at the hearing and no request for written reasons was recorded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Tribunal found a series of unauthorised deductions in the period 3 September 2024 to 31 October 2024; gross sum awarded was £1,528.20 (claimant responsible for tax and NI). | Upheld | — | £1,528 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,528
- across all upheld claims
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.