Two women have taken their former estate agent employer to tribunal and in both cases seen some of their claims succeed.

In one case, the woman had worked at the agency, London Property Guru in Wimbledon, London, for less than a month.

Patricia Tumba worked there between April 4, 2018, and May 1, 2018, and has now won some £260 for unauthorised deductions from wages and holiday pay.

She had replied to an advertisement for a lettings administrator, and was offered a job at £15,000 basic, plus a £2,000 car allowance, 10% on each let, and 3% of new listings. Altogether, on-target earnings for the first year were £30,000.

However, Ms Tumba left the company without any notice. The agency argued that she should have given a week’s notice, but the tribunal found that she did not have to, as the statutory minimum periods of notice only apply after a month’s continuous employment.

Ms Tumba argued that the firm had not given her a contract, but the tribunal said that written statements of employment must be provided within eight weeks of employment – and this did not apply in her case.

However, the London South tribunal did find that Ms Tumba was entitled to holiday pay for 2.2 days, totalling £126.92.

She was also owed car allowance for the three and a half weeks she was at the firm, entitling her to £135.10.

Her claims that the firm failed to provide her with an itemised payslip as well as particulars of employment were both dismissed.

In the other case, heard by the same tribunal, Ms N Kaur had resigned orally from the firm on June 13, 2018, and in writing two days later, giving notice that her employment would end on July 31, 2018.

However, on June 18 – a Monday – when she went to work, she was told to hand over the keys and not attend for work.

The firm believed that her employment ended that day, but also argued that had it given the one week’s notice required by the contract, the employment would have ended on June 20. She had been paid up until that date.

The tribunal decided that despite a lack of evidence – the resignation letter was not disclosed by the firm and could not be produced by the claimant who had written it on her work computer – she would have given notice as July 31.

This would have given her time to get another job, and the agency time to recruit her replacement.

She was therefore entitled to wages up to July 31, plus holiday entitlement calculated until then.

Ms Kaur also claimed for commission, but did not provide documentation. She also claimed for incentive pay. Both these claims were dismissed, along with a claim that she had not been given an itemised payslip, which had since been provided.

The tribunal ruled that London Property Guru must pay her £1,967.28 in relation to pay, and £392.29 outstanding holiday pay.

The employment tribunal’s reserved judgment also makes reference to a sex discrimination claim, but says that this was “separated from this hearing and for which a separate order has been made”.