Ms. June Wright v - Solicitor McCarthy & Stone Management Services Ltd. — 2022

Ms. June Wright was employed by McCarthy & Stone Management Services Ltd as House Manager at Conachar Court from 2016. The tribunal found that the dismissal decision was based on conduct, namely: accepting a ?400 cheque from a homeowner and not reporting the gift in line with policy; writing cheques for the homeowner and being involved in organising and paying carers; and entering the homeowner's flat in non-emergency situations during Covid restrictions, including staying to make coffee. It rejected the claimant's case that the dismissal related only to the cheque-writing issue.

The tribunal accepted that the respondent genuinely believed Mrs. Wright had committed the misconduct alleged and held that a reasonable investigation had been carried out. It found that the employer had obtained accounts from the claimant, the care worker AG and Mr Henderson, and that no further investigation was required into the ?400 cheque issue. For the care-arrangement allegation, the tribunal relied on the WhatsApp and text messages, which it said on their face strongly suggested Mrs. Wright was involved in organising carers and their payments. It also held that the Covid allegation was supported by Mrs. Wright's admissions that she had entered the flat and stayed to make coffee.

The tribunal rejected the procedural criticisms, including complaints about insufficient preparation time, reliance on the WhatsApp messages, and the Article 8 challenge. It held that the messages were relevant to the claimant's work at Conachar Court, that she was later given a fair opportunity to comment on them at and after the appeal stage, and that the disciplinary and appeal process was basically fair. Applying the Burchell approach and the band of reasonable responses test, the tribunal concluded that dismissal for the conduct found was fair, so the unfair dismissal claim was dismissed. It noted only hypothetically that, if unfair dismissal had been established, it would have found substantial contributory conduct and would not have made any compensatory award because of an earlier unreported master key incident.