THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALS

CASE REF:	 1584/14 

CLAIMANT:		John Ross	

RESPONDENT:	Tailored Mobiles Limited

DECISION 

The claimant’s claim is dismissed.

Constitution of Tribunal:

Employment Judge (sitting alone):	Employment Judge Murray

Appearances:

The claimant did not appear and was not represented.

The respondent was represented by Mr T Sheridan of Peninsula Business 
Services Ltd.

REASONS

1.	The claim before the tribunal was for unlawful deduction from wages in the sum of £290.  The respondent agreed that that sum had been deducted from the claimant’s final wage.

2.	In view of the fact that it was agreed that a deduction had taken place, I heard evidence from Mr Watkins who was one of the two Directors in the respondent company.

3.	I found the evidence of Mr Watkins to be consistent and credible and accepted entirely his account of his dealings with the claimant.  I found the following relevant facts from the evidence of Mr Watkins and from the documentation to which I was referred.

4.	The claimant was employed as a Sales Manager from 2 August 2011 until 2 June 2014.  From approximately December 2011 the claimant began to ask for advances from his pay.  This happened almost every month whereby the claimant would get an advance on his pay and would repay it out of his next month’s payslip, or over the following months in instalments.

5.	In February 2014 the claimant’s car was clamped at the gates of the respondent’s premises.  The claimant therefore asked for an urgent advance on his pay in order to pay the necessary fees to have his car unclamped.  This was effected by Mr Watkins paying the necessary fees on the claimant’s behalf.  At all times it was understood by Mr Watkins that this was an advance on the claimant’s pay which was also in line with the pattern of advances on pay which had occurred on a regular basis over the previous years.

6.	In March 2014 Mr Watkins advanced £40.00 for fuel for the claimant’s car in order to enable him to get to work and this was also provided by way of an advance on the claimant’s pay.

7.	The claimant’s last payslip for May 2014, which was the last full month he worked for the respondents, had the sum of £290.00 deducted from it which related to the following:

	(a)	£100.00 and £150.00 in relation to instalments for repayment of the advance on pay in relation to the clamping incident.

	(b)	£40.00 in relation to the advance on pay connected to the fuel payment.

8.	Under the Employment Rights (Northern Ireland) Order 1996 (as amended) an employee has the right not to suffer unauthorised deductions.  (Article 47).  The meaning of “wages” is outlined at Article 59 of ERO.  Advances on wages are excluded from the definition of “wages” by virtue of Article 59(2).

9.	I am therefore satisfied that the employer was entitled to deduct the sum of £290.00 from the claimant’s wages in respect of the advances of pay which the claimant also agreed could be taken out of his wages.

10.	The claimant’s claim is therefore dismissed.

Employment Judge:       

Date and place of hearing:	27 February 2015, Belfast.	

Date decision recorded in register and issued to parties: