[2024] UKUT 192 (AAC)

“Having considered your representations, we acknowledge that you have denied having any financial difficulties and stated that if you had been discussing Christmas with the service user, you may have made a comment around how expensive Christmas is and that the service user may have misunderstood this.

However you have then denied taking any money from the service user and questioned how the service user would have been able to go to the bank due to her mobility. It is acknowledged the service user had poor mobility but it is reasonable to state that the service user may not have went out to the bank to get this money or could have been accompanied if asked.

You also alleged that the service user was an alcoholic, however no evidence has been provided around this and police considered the service user as a credible source.

We accept that during your investigation and disciplinary meetings, you did not attend due to being off sick, however it remains that you do not appear to have provided a reasonable explanation around this allegation or why the service user would fabricate an allegation of this nature.

We have also considered that you claimed your employer was being deceptive in trying to find means to terminate your employment, however we also have police information which has supported that these claims. Whilst we do have limited information, police deemed it sufficient to state that you were given money from a service user, and whilst they cannot prosecute when money is given willingly, the DBS can take action where we believe the money has only been given due to coercion that has taken place. You were in a position of trust, which you abused by speaking about your financial difficulties in order to persuade the service user to give you some money. It is reasonable to state that had you not mentioned your financial situation then the service user would not have made the offer, and in any event you failed to repay the money and this has resulted in financial harm to the service user.

Therefore we are satisfied that this finding remains, on the balance of probabilities.

Having considered this, DBS is satisfied you engaged in relevant conduct in relation to vulnerable adults. This is because you have engaged in conduct which endangered a vulnerable adult or was likely to endanger a vulnerable adult.

We are satisfied a barring decision is appropriate. This is because we are now satisfied that the evidence in this case appears to show that you have financially abused a vulnerable adult in your care by accepting approximately £1,500 from a service user in your care after telling her you had no money to feed yourself or your son or for Christmas.

We are satisfied this behaviour has caused significant financial and emotional harm, particularly that you have failed to repay any of this money.

Whilst you have provided positive references within your representations, you continue to deny the behaviour and largely provide information around your mental health struggles, which we are not disputing. Therefore it remains that you have abused your position of trust by telling a vulnerable adult about your personal issues and accepting money from her, despite this vulnerable adult relying on you for care. You have not faced up to your behaviour or repaid any money, suggesting that you would be likely to repeat this behaviour again in the future.

Therefore, we are satisfied it is likely that if you were to work in regulated activity with vulnerable adults in the future, you would be likely to financially abuse them for your own personal gain, which would always be likely to cause harm.

As such, we are satisfied it is appropriate to include your name in the Adults' Barred List.

In examining the proportionality of including your name in the Adults' Barred List, your article 8 Human Rights have been considered as follows;

We also considered that your inclusion may impact on your wellbeing further. However, we are satisfied you pose a significant risk of financial and emotional harm to vulnerable adults if you were to engage in regulated activity.

Therefore we are satisfied it is both appropriate and proportionate to include your name in the Adults' Barred List.”