Expert help to clean up an unwanted disciplinary process

When Flo admitted taking two items from work without permission and selling them online but not for personal gain, any argument it was not theft was always going to be a difficult one to win.

It was, however, a defence put forward by one of our representatives, and it did prove to be successful.

Flo, a property claims handler, was eventually cleared of theft following a disciplinary  hearing at which she faced allegations of stealing company property.

She took two plant pots left out with the rubbish when part of the office building where she worked was being refurbished.

Flo, who had worked for her employer for over a decade, believed the items had been discarded.

She originally took them to give to a friend who had just moved house. Her friend did not want the pots, and Flo later sold them online for £50.

When Flo told colleagues what she had done, she certainly did not believe she had done anything wrong.

So it was a huge shock when she was summoned to her manager’s office, quizzed about stealing the pots, admitted taking and selling them, and was suspended from work for theft.

Flo was told it was a serious matter, the items were company property and taken without permission and she had boasted about it.

She was invited to an investigation meeting, also known as a fact-finding meeting, as part of the disciplinary investigation process.

Flo insisted that she honestly believed the pots were rubbish and no longer wanted. She said she had given the money to charity, but offered to give her employer the amount she had sold them for.

Devastated Flo contacted our Employee Support Centre when she was later invited to attend a disciplinary hearing.

When our representative discussed the case with Flo, he felt an aggravating factor was the claim she had boasted to colleagues about what she had done.

Flo insisted that she had not done so, despite the fact it was stated in the letter inviting her to the disciplinary hearing.

Our representative requested witness statements from the employer to support the allegation. He pointed out the statements should be provided in accordance with the ACAS Code of Practice.

Following an exchange of emails, the employer confirmed it had not taken witness statements, which it said was because Flo admitted taking and selling the pots.

 At the disciplinary hearing, our representative argued Flo did not knowingly or intentionally commit an act of theft, and there was no evidence to support she had boasted about her actions.

He said it was reasonable for her to believe the items were rubbish and no longer company property or wanted, given they had been left out for collection with other discarded items. Our representative asserted that at worst, Flo made a genuine mistake in believing that.

It was explained that Flo’s intention in what she did was important, as was what she did afterwards. 

The hearing was told she thought the pots would be ideal for her friend’s new home. An email from her friend was presented to the hearing to support Flo had offered them to her for free.

Flo later sold them because she thought it would be a shame to throw them away, and she put the money to good use.

She used to the £50 to sponsor her cousin who was doing a charity run to raise money for cancer research. Evidence of this was provided to the disciplinary hearing chair.

This was used to undermine the claim Flo boasted about selling the pots, which suggested she had made a personal gain from taking them.

Our representative maintained Flo’s innocence and explained she was also not aware of any policy covering employees taking discarded items.

He also told the hearing of her long and admirable work record and selfless contributions to the company over the years.

Following the disciplinary hearing, the chair decided Flo did not commit a deliberate act of theft. She was cleared of the allegation.