Ms Y Mulinde v Penine Way Ltd: 2301512/2020
JUDGMENT
[1]The Claimant’s claim is dismissed in its entirety.[2]No order as to costs.REASONS
[1]This is a claim brought by the Claimant, Ms. Yvonne Mulinde against the Respondent, Penine Way Ltd in respect of unpaid wages and other associated losses.[2]The Claimant was not in attendance at the hearing and has not informed the Tribunal of a good reason for her absence. My clerk attempted to contact her by email and telephone but received no response. Having satisfied myself that the Claimant had been sent the notice of hearing I decided to proceed with the hearing today.[3]The proceedings have been brought by way of claim form which was received on 13 April 2020.[4]In the claim form the claimant claims £3,000 made up of the following: Case No: 2301512/20a. £900 in unpaid wages following her leaving employmentb. £1,200 housing benefitc. £150 council tax benefitd. £400 damagese. £350 pension owed.[5]In addition, she claims that no pay slip has been provided.[6]The Claimant claims that she was paid £660 in her final pay which was too low. She has not explained how she has calculated the £900 allegedly owed nor provided sufficient evidence for me to otherwise find that she is owed £900. Therefore, I dismiss the claim for £900 unpaid wages. For the same reasons I dismiss the claim for £350 pension payments.[7]The Claimant claims that the Respondent misreported her income to HMRC and that as a result she has lost out on housing and council tax benefit. She has not provided any evidence to support this allegation of overreporting, nor has she provided evidence to support her calculation of the figures owed. In any event this claim is beyond the remit of the Tribunal and is a matter to take up with the relevant Department who pay her benefits. As such I dismiss the claims for £1,200 housing benefit and £150 council tax benefit.[8]The claim for £400 in damages is not particularised. I assume that it relates to the stress she experienced and inconvenience in having to take time off work to deal with the benefits situation as this is mentioned in the box at 9.2 on the ET1. However, the claim is not particularised and unevidenced. As such I dismiss the claim for £400 damages.[9]Furthermore, the Claimant alleges that she has not received any pay slips for this period, the Respondent denies this. I can see in the bundle pay slips for the relevant period. Therefore, I find that she has now been provided with them, regardless of the position prior to the issuing of proceedings and dismiss this element of the claim.[10]Written reasons have been provided as the Claimant was not in attendance at the hearing.