UT UA-2024-000745-V - [2025] UKUT 129 (AAC)
Fecha: 28-Mar-2025
SLS’s statement to her employer
SLS’s statement to her employer
SLS made a statement on 5 January 2023. It was recorded by GD, the Service Manager:
I spoke to SLS and made her aware of some of the allegations made against her that had been reported to myself today.
I mentioned some of the accusations i.e. Telling an individual to ‘fuck off’, telling them ‘good, move then’ when the individual said that he wanted to move house. SLS denied these allegations, although did state that there was a conversation relating to moving house, but the conversation was more around that if he kept turning all these houses down then the decision may be taken out of his hands and his sister may have to make the choice. SLS did say that there is a rule that no one has a drink or access to the kitchen between 10pm and 7am as the sleep-in staff are right next to the kitchen.*
SLS also denied stating that the individual is not told he does not have enough money for things but makes him aware he needs to be careful about what he spends.
SLS also denies restricting drinks but will encourage to have alternative drinks before coffee (such as juice/water).
SLS also stated that the individual has made allegations prior about other staff but is currently pinpointing herself.
SLS was told that due to the allegations made that we would need to suspend on full pay, SLS was made aware this is not part of the disciplinary procedure, but a way to protect not only the individuals but herself form any further accusations whilst they are investigated.
* At the hearing SLS told us that this paragraph was not the whole of the conversation with the service user and that a service user was allowed to have a drink if they came down for one.
SLS’s resignation
GD replied an hour later, saying:
Thank you for your email. Would you like to arrange a time to meet up and discuss your resignation?
- Heading
- On appeal from the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS from now on)
- Some abbreviations
- Introduction
- The reason for referring the case to DBS
- The barring provisions
- The appeal provisions
- Mental Capacity Act 2005
- Our approach to the case
- Service users
- Members of staff
- SLS’s statement to her employer
- SLS replied within minutes, saying
- SLS’s representations to DBS
- References for SLS
- Our assessment of the evidence
- Conspiracy
- Influencing the service users
- Limiting choices
- Conclusion
- Proportionality
- whether the objective of the measure is sufficiently important to justify the limitation of a protected right
- whether the measure is rationally connected to the objective
- whether a less intrusive measure could have been used without unacceptably compromising the achievement of the objective
- whether, balancing the severity of the measure's effects on the rights of the persons to whom it applies against the importance of the objective, to the extent that the measure will contribute to its
- Conclusions