Claimant v Cash Converters Yorkshire Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the claimant sold an Airbrush to his store without Regional Manager approval in breach of the Employee Usage policy. The respondent conducted a reasonable investigation and held a genuine belief in the misconduct. The dismissal decision was within the range of reasonable responses given the respondent's zero-tolerance approach to such policy breaches, the claimant's seniority and length of service (making the breach more serious), and reasonable doubts about the claimant's honesty regarding his explanation. The procedure followed was reasonable despite some minor shortcomings.
Facts
The claimant was a Store Manager with 10 years' service who sold a personal Airbrush to his store for £40 without obtaining required Regional Manager approval, contrary to the Employee Usage policy. The item was overpriced and later sold for £19.99, causing a £20.01 loss. The claimant claimed he misunderstood a policy change in October 2024, but the tribunal found his explanations inconsistent and lacking credibility. He was dismissed for gross misconduct after a disciplinary hearing on 9 April 2025 and his appeal was rejected on 29 April 2025.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed the unfair dismissal claim. It found the respondent had a fair reason for dismissal (conduct), conducted a reasonable investigation, and held a genuine belief in the claimant's misconduct on reasonable grounds. The decision to dismiss was within the range of reasonable responses given the zero-tolerance policy on unauthorized staff sales, the claimant's seniority making his breach more serious, and reasonable doubts about his honesty. The procedure was reasonable despite minor shortcomings, and alleged comparators were not in truly parallel circumstances.
Practical note
Senior managers with long service who breach clear policies face heightened scrutiny, and inconsistent explanations during disciplinary processes can reasonably lead employers to conclude dishonesty, justifying dismissal for gross misconduct even for relatively low-value transactions.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6022319/2025
- Decision date
- 27 October 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- retail
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Store Manager
- Salary band
- £40,000–£50,000
- Service
- 10 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No