Eco - Campsites Ltd

Case Summary

The claimant was employed by Eco-campsites Limited as a campsite worker. On reconsideration, the tribunal found the claimant was underpaid by £1,265.71 in respect of minimum wage violations and was owed £310.64 for accrued holiday pay. The respondent was ordered to pay the claimant a total of £1,576.35 subject to appropriate tax and National Insurance deductions.

The tribunal found the claimant was not paid the National Minimum Wage during her employment; the accommodation offset of £9.99 per day did not apply because the living accommodation provided did not justify paying below minimum wage; and the claimant had accrued 9.5 days of holiday pay which had not been fully paid.

• •Whether claimant was paid National Minimum Wage
• •Hours worked by claimant
• •Whether accommodation offset of £9.99 per day applied
• •Payment of end of season bonus and its relevance to minimum wage
• •Accrued holiday pay calculation

1 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Miss H Condliffe Henry Respondent: Eco-campsites Limited Heard at: Ashford (by video) On: 30 January 2026 Before: Employment Judge Corrigan Appearances For the claimant: In person For the respondent: Mr Pal, Litigation Consultant RECONSIDERATION RESERVED JUDGMENT 1. The Reserved Judgment dated 16 July 2025 was reconsidered and varied as follows. 2. The claimant was not paid the Minimum Wage during her employment. 3. The shortfall in wages amounts to £1,452.56 £1,265.71 which are to be paid by the respondent to the claimant, subject to the appropriate deductions for tax and National Insurance. 4. The claimant’s complaint that the respondent failed to pay her accrued holiday is well-founded and the respondent is ordered to pay £310.64 to the claimant, subject to the appropriate deductions for tax and National Insurance. 5. The total to be paid to the claimant by the respondent is £1,763.20 £1,576.35, subject to the appropriate deductions for tax and National Insurance. 2 REASONS 6. The respondent applied for a reconsideration of the judgment as set out in the correspondence dated 31 July 2025. 7. I considered it was necessary in the interests of justice to deal with this matter by way of a hearing. I informed the parties that I would reconsider 7.1 whether or not I should have dealt with the Minimum Wage claim including whether it should have been treated as an application to amend and whether that application should be allowed (for the avoidance of doubt this reconsideration will include whether or not the claimant’s primary claim that she worked substantially more hours than I found should be allowed to proceed, by way of an amendment or otherwise); 7.2 if the Minimum wage claim does proceed in some form, the hours the claimant worked and what she should have been paid; 7.3 whether the living accommodation at either cam…