Mr J Lennon and Others v Q2 Signature Group Ltd: 2306250/2024
JUDGMENT
The tribunal heard evidence from the Claimants’. The Respondent did not attend and was not represented. The claim has been served upon both the registered offices and the business address of the Respondent but no response has been received. Notice of the hearing has been sent to the Respondent’s business address. There are no further contact details available for the Respondent and the Claimants each gave evidence that despite their repeated efforts to make contact with the Respondent they have had no reply to their communications. The judgment of the Tribunal is as follows: Mr Joe Lennon Wages[1]The complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages is well-founded. The respondent made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages in the period 1 June 2024 to 30 June 2024.[2]The respondent shall pay the claimant £3,063.20, which is the gross sum deducted. The claimant is responsible for the payment of any tax or National Insurance. Case Number: 2306250/2024 2[3]The respondent shall also pay the claimant £650 to compensate the claimant for financial loss attributable to the unauthorised deduction. Notice Pay[4]The complaint of breach of contract in relation to notice pay is well-founded.[5]The respondent shall also pay the claimant £2,500 as damages for breach of contract. This figure has been calculated using gross pay to reflect the likelihood that the claimant will have to pay tax on it as Post Employment Notice Pay. Mr Samuel Palmer Wages[6]The complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages is well-founded. The respondent made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages in the period 1 June 2024 to 30 June 2024.[7]The respondent shall pay the claimant £2,083.33, which is the gross sum deducted. The claimant is responsible for the payment of any tax or National Insurance. Notice Pay[8]The complaint of breach of contract in relation to notice pay is well-founded.[9]The respondent shall also pay the claimant £2,083.33 as damages for breach of contract. This figure has been calculated using gross pay to reflect the likelihood that the claimant will have to pay tax on it as Post Employment Notice Pay. Redundancy Payment[10]Under section 163 Employment Rights Act 1996 it is also determined that the claimant is entitled to a redundancy payment of £1,040. Mr George Thomas[11]The complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages is well-founded. The respondent made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages in the period 1 June 2024 to 30 June 2024.[12]The respondent shall pay the claimant £2,416.67, which is the gross sum deducted. The claimant is responsible for the payment of any tax or National Insurance. Case Number: 2306250/2024 3 Notice Pay[13]The complaint of breach of contract in relation to notice pay is well-founded.[14]The respondent shall also pay the claimant £2,416.67 as damages for breach of contract. This figure has been calculated using gross pay to reflect the likelihood that the claimant will have to pay tax on it as Post Employment Notice Pay. Miss Maddison Pegg[15]The complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages is well-founded. The respondent made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages in the period 1 June 2024 to 30 June 2024.[16]The respondent shall pay the claimant £2,327.42, which is the gross sum deducted. The claimant is responsible for the payment of any tax or National Insurance. Notice Pay[17]The complaint of breach of contract in relation to notice pay is well-founded.[18]The respondent shall also pay the claimant £2,327.42 as damages for breach of contract. This figure has been calculated using gross pay to reflect the likelihood that the claimant will have to pay tax on it as Post Employment Notice Pay. Ms Mia Stageman[19]Ms Stageman was initially included as a claimant in the schedule to this multiple claim form but has subsequently submitted her own ET1 claim which has been accepted and awaits directions under tribunal reference 2306121/2024. She has not attended the hearing today and so her complaint in respect of this claim only is stayed pending any further clarification from this claimant as to whether this claim is perused or not. Employment Judge Richter 10 November 2025 Case Number: 2306250/2024 4 Note Reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing. Written reasons will not be provided unless a party asked for them at the hearing or a party makes a written request within 14 days of the sending of this written record of the decision.