[2025] UKUT 219 (AAC)

In regard to Finding 1, there was an error of fact because the Appellant did not sleep on duty on 6 August 2020; Teresa must have left the property when the Appellant went outside to hang out washing (Ground 1)

In regard to Finding 2, there was an error of fact because the Appellant checked Teresa for injury, going into the house to get a blanket, umbrella and pillow to make Teresa comfortable/responsive (Ground 2)

In regard to Finding 3, there was an error of fact because the ambulance driver insisted the Appellant provide the client file so the Appellant refused for confidentiality reasons (Ground 3)

In regard to Findings 4 and 5, there was an error of fact because the Appellant had been locked out of the digital application allowing her to issue medication and record it accurately and the other carer arrived early so the Appellant asked her to issue and record it instead (Ground 4)

In regard to Findings 4 and 5, there was an error of fact because the Appellant received a verbal, not written warning (Ground 5)

In regard to Findings 1-3 there was an error of law because the DBS (i) failed to obtain additional information in the form of written accounts from the witnesses of the events on 6 August 2020 and (ii) relied solely on [the Adult Social Care] email account (Ground 6)

In regard to all the findings, there was an error of law because the DBS failed to take a rational approach to the evaluation of evidence and/or failed to reconcile conflicting evidence in an adequate way (Ground 7)

In regard to Findings 1-3 there was an error of law because the DBS failed to give adequate consideration to the Appellant’s evidence that she reported Teresa’s past falls and episodes of leaving the house (Ground 8)

There was an error of law because the decision to place the Appellant on the lists was disproportionate (Ground 9).