Short-service employee wins £3,876 for unauthorised deductions and breach of contract
A former employee with less than two years' service was awarded £3,876 after the tribunal found unauthorised wage deductions and a breach of contract over notice pay. The employer also failed to provide written particulars.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #breach-of-contract
- #unfair-dismissal
- #unauthorised-deductions
- #written-statement-failure
- #section-38-uplift
Key facts
- The claimant was employed by the respondent for less than two years.
- The respondent made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages.
- The claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice.
- The respondent failed to provide a statutory statement of particulars of employment.
- The tribunal awarded £1,496 for unauthorised deductions, £1,496 for breach of contract, and £884.30 for failure to provide written particulars.
Timeline
-
First judgment striking out unfair dismissal and written reasons claims
Employment Judge Leach struck out the complaints of unfair dismissal and failure to provide written reasons because the claimant had less than two years' service.
-
Second judgment on unauthorised deductions and breach of contract
Employment Judge Ross found that the respondent made an unauthorised deduction from wages and dismissed the claimant in breach of contract. The tribunal ordered payment of £1,496 for each claim and an additional £884.30 under section 38 of the Employment Act 2002.
-
Judgment sent to parties
The written record of the decision was sent to the parties, starting the 14-day period for payment without interest.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant could bring unfair dismissal and written reasons claims with less than two years' service, and whether the employer made unauthorised deductions and breached the contract of employment.
The outcome
The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal and written reasons claims because the claimant had less than two years' service, as required by sections 108 and 92 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
However, the tribunal found that the employer had made an unauthorised deduction from wages and dismissed the claimant in breach of contract regarding notice. It also failed to provide a statutory statement of particulars.
The compensation awarded was:
- £1,496 for unauthorised deductions
- £1,496 for breach of contract (notice pay)
- £884.30 for failure to provide written particulars (section 38 uplift)
- Total: £3,876.30
Lessons & takeaways
- Employees with less than two years' service cannot claim unfair dismissal, but can still bring claims for unauthorised deductions and breach of contract.
- Employers must provide a written statement of particulars within two months of employment, or risk an additional award of two to four weeks' pay.
- Deducting wages without lawful authority or contractual agreement is a breach of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and can lead to a tribunal order for repayment.
- Even short-service employees are entitled to notice pay; failing to provide it is a breach of contract that can be remedied through the tribunal.
When short service doesn't mean no rights
This case shows that even employees with less than two years' service can successfully bring certain claims. While the former employee's unfair dismissal claim was automatically struck out due to the statutory two-year qualifying period, the tribunal still found in their favour on three other grounds: unauthorised deductions, breach of contract, and failure to provide written particulars.
The employer, The CS Group Limited, made an unauthorised deduction from wages and dismissed the employee without proper notice. These are straightforward breaches of employment law that do not require a minimum length of service. The tribunal also noted that the employer failed to provide a written statement of particulars, which is a basic legal requirement for all employees.
What the employer could have done differently
Had the employer provided a written contract from the start, they would have avoided the additional award of £884.30 under section 38 of the Employment Act 2002. Paying the correct wages and giving proper notice would have prevented the other claims entirely. The case highlights that employment protections extend beyond unfair dismissal, and employers cannot rely on short service to avoid basic obligations.
Why this matters for similar claims
For employees, this decision is a reminder that not all employment rights depend on length of service. Claims for unpaid wages, notice pay, and written particulars are accessible from day one. For employers, it underscores the importance of maintaining proper records and complying with contractual and statutory duties, regardless of how long someone has worked for them.
Similar cases
Suspended and dismissed for refusing to give up holiday rights: a whistleblowing case
A security services employee was unfairly dismissed and subjected to detriments after refusing to forego holiday rights. The tribunal awarded over £46,000 in compensation.
Café worker automatically unfairly dismissed for asserting right to written contract
A café worker with only six months' service was automatically unfairly dismissed after asking for a written contract. The tribunal awarded over £2,000 including injury to feelings for age discrimination.
Unfair dismissal but 100% Polkey reduction due to workplace closure
A former employee was unfairly dismissed but received only limited compensation because the tribunal found he would have been fairly dismissed a month later when the workplace closed. Total award: £12,419.29.
TUPE transfer failure: employees awarded £25,000 after being left behind
Two employees were unfairly dismissed and awarded £25,000 in damages after their employer failed to transfer them under TUPE regulations. The tribunal also made a protective award of 90 days' pay for failure to consult.