The Fair Work Ombudsman (FWO) has taken legal action against the former operator of Melbourne-based Geek Central Australia, a computer retail and repair business, over unpaid wages and entitlements to a part-time staffer employed by the business between 2015-2023.
The FWO received a request for assistance from the worker and subsequently issued a compliance notice to Daniel Capozzi, a sole trader who owned and operated Geek Central Australia in Maribyrnong before the business closed
A Fair Work Inspector issued the notice to Capozzi in December 2025 after forming a belief he had failed to pay the worker’s minimum wages for ordinary hours, annual and personal leave entitlements, payment in lieu of notice of termination, and public holiday-related pay.
The Fair Work Ombudsman alleges Capozzi, "without reasonable excuse", failed to comply with the Compliance Notice, which required him to calculate and back-pay the worker’s entitlements.
It is alleged the total amount Mr Capozzi was required to pay to comply with the Compliance Notice was $25,362; this amount was rectified after legal action was commenced.
Fair Work Ombudsman Anna Booth said the regulator would continue to enforce workplace laws and take action in court where lawful requests are not complied with.
“Where employers do not comply, we will take appropriate action to protect employees. A court can order penalties and require back payment of outstanding workplace entitlements,” she said.
“It is a significant amount that we allege the worker was owed.
The Fair Work Ombudsman is seeking a penalty in court for the alleged failure to comply with the Compliance Notice. Capozzi faces a penalty of up to $19,800.
A directions hearing is listed in the Federal Circuit and Family Court in Melbourne on 23 June 2026.
Last year, the FWO secured the maximum available penalty in court against a Perth-based IT company for failing to comply with a compliance notice requiring it calculate and back-pay a full-time helpdesk worker’s entitlements the Ombudsman alleged were owed.
It also commenced legal action against the former owner-operator of an IT services company, alleging he was involved in underpaying workers almost $150,000.




