Claimant v Sequence (UK) Limited

Outcome

Facts

The claimant was a senior mortgage adviser with nearly three years' service. Following a key performance indicator review in October 2023, his line manager identified concerns about applications he had completed for a client (Client X). The investigation found he had provided inaccurate information to a mortgage lender and insurance provider, including stating the client had been employed for 12 months when he had only been in the UK 5-6 months and was working through agencies, stating the client had a permanent right to reside in the UK when he did not, and answering insurance eligibility questions inaccurately. Similar issues were found in other client files. The claimant admitted errors but said he was acting in clients' best interests and had a different interpretation of the rules. He had received training on these requirements the previous year after similar concerns were raised.

Decision

The tribunal found the dismissal was fair. The respondent had a genuine belief in the misconduct based on reasonable grounds following a reasonable investigation. The claimant had provided inaccurate information placing customers at risk (particularly regarding insurance that would not pay out on a claim) and exposing the respondent to reputational and regulatory risk. Despite one minor procedural issue (proceeding with the disciplinary hearing when the claimant had not read the investigation report), dismissal fell within the range of reasonable responses given the seriousness of the conduct in a regulated industry, the pattern of errors, prior training, and the respondent's reasonable conclusion that the claimant's mindset meant further training would not prevent recurrence.

Practical note

Legal authorities cited