Posted Date: 26th June 2025

A construction labourer (Mr Pitchell) used a company credit card, which he had been given for his expenses, to purchase £100 of personal items.

The following morning, he called his employer, JATA Construction, to inform them of what he had done and that he wanted to repay them the money. The following week he left £100 cash in the office.

Two days later, Mr Pitchell was called to a meeting with the director Mr Taylor to explain his actions. A further two days later he was called to a meeting and was dismissed for gross misconduct, with a letter confirming this, and the reason stated as having “misappropriated the company credit card”.

Mr Pitchell appealed his dismissal and he was invited to an appeal meeting over one month later, which was held by Mr Taylor again, but the company rejected his appeal.

The tribunal discovered that Mr Pitchell had previously been underpaid by JATA Construction by approximately £9,000. Mr Pitchell had discussed the debt with Mr Taylor, who repaid him the debt over a 10 month period, which including buying the employee tools which were offset against the debt. On the date of the dismissal, JATA still owed Mr Pitchell £60 in unpaid wages.

It was also found that Mr Pitchell and Mr Taylor were friends, with Mr Pitchell regularly working on Mr Taylor’s house and working as a driver for Mr Taylor’s family. 

The judge deemed the dismissal to be unfair due to the following reasons:

• The dismissal did not take into account the personal relationship between Pitchell and Taylor, Taylor had confirmed he would have lent Pitchell the money if he needed it
• When Pitchell was owed money by the company previously, it was allowed to build up to a large amount, whereas Pitchell repaid the money within a few days, so the dismissal was unreasonable 
• There was an inadequate investigation, failing to take into account the personal money lending relationship previously in place
• The disciplinary procedure was unfair, as the same director investigated the issue,  and made the initial decision and the appeal decision 

JATA have been ordered to pay Mr Pitchell £26,297, for unfair dismissal and compensation.

The personal nature between individuals is often overlooked in a disciplinary investigation, however this case highlights the importance of taking the relationship into account, if it bears weight to the case. 

For support with your own disciplinary procedures and other HR matters, please get in touch.