M Robison Mr C Adams v Represented by In person Carpetright plc — 2018

The claimant had worked for the respondent for over 22 years and was managing the Forge store when the respondent had centralised its home measuring system and introduced Home Flooring Surveyors. On 13 February 2017 he was taken into an investigation meeting about using fitters to carry out home measurements and processing sales before payment. He admitted using fitters on 15 occasions, said this was done for customer service reasons rather than financial gain, and was suspended on full pay pending further investigation.

After a second investigation and a disciplinary hearing on 25 April 2017, the claimant was issued with a first and final written warning by letter dated 27 April 2017. The tribunal accepted that the respondent was entitled under its policy to investigate and suspend, that the missing notes from the second investigation had simply been mislaid, and that the disciplinary sanction was within the range allowed by the policy. Applying the constructive dismissal authorities, the tribunal held that the respondent's conduct, viewed objectively, was not a fundamental breach of contract and was not conduct the claimant could not reasonably be expected to put up with.

The tribunal noted that the claimant resigned immediately after receiving the warning, saying he felt his integrity had been questioned, but found that the disciplinary process itself did not destroy or seriously damage the relationship of trust and confidence. It therefore held that he had not been dismissed for the purposes of the unfair dismissal claim and dismissed that claim. On the wages issue, the tribunal accepted evidence about the over-discounting/bonus system and held that deductions of £193.31 in March and £129.88 in April were not unlawful. It found that the May deduction was made in error because payroll treated him as if he were on sick leave, and after allowing for three days' pay after resignation, ordered repayment of £329.71.