Richmondshire District Council faces £500,000 bill after care worker wongly accused of theft

A LOCAL authority is facing a bill of more than £500,000 after agreeing to pay compensation to a part-time care worker wrongly accused of theft.

Senior councillors at Richmondshire District Council tonight (Friday, March 15) defended their handling of the case.

Jean Thacker took legal action against the authority after being suspended from her job as a live-in warden at Noels Court sheltered housing, in Catterick Village, North Yorkshire.

According to details released by her solicitor Stephen Jackson, Mrs Thacker, 63, was suspended in October 2010 when a member of the public claimed she had persuaded his elderly bother, a resident at the unit, to set up a bank account to allow her to steal money from him.

Mrs Thacker was barred from her flat and forced to move in with her elderly parents in Newport, South Wales.

In July 2011, police dropped their investigation, confirming that no bank account ever existed.

However, it took until a year after the original suspension for the council to complete its own disciplinary processes and to dismiss the allegations, said Mr Jackson, of employment law specialists Jackson Osborne.

Even then the council failed to properly acknowledge her innocence, he added.

After 16 months of suspension and allegations, Mrs Thacker began suffering from severe depression.

Mr Jackson said he was “astounded” by the lack of evidence against his client and the intransigence shown by senior management at the council.

He said: “As her health could not improve while the council failed properly to acknowledge her innocence, Mrs Thacker could cope no longer and in March 2012 she resigned claiming constructive dismissal.”

Mrs Thacker said: “I would not wish my worst enemy to go through what I have suffered.

"I lost my home and my friends. I regarded the residents at Noels Court as my friends and still it worries me how they have been treated.”

Referring to the settlement, she said: “I will look on this settlement as the apology I was due.”

Richmondshire District Council will pay Mrs Thacker £345,000, but the council will also pay her tax, which could push the bill to almost £600,000, her solicitor said.

Council leader John Blackie said: “Richmondshire District Council takes its duty of care for residents living in its sheltered housing schemes very seriously indeed - the well-being for the 30 residents in Noels Court was its key priority in this matter.

“In this case we unfortunately allowed our duties to our residents to take our attention off our responsibilities to the employee.

“We believed the course of action we took was the appropriate way to deal with what was a complex and very sensitive set of circumstances but we now accept that acting this way breached employment rights under employment law.”

Coun Blackie said the council had launched an investigation into the case.

The council said the settlement would be taken from the authority’s housing contingency reserve and would not affect the council's housing programme in any way.

“This case is unique to Richmondshire District Council as in the last 20 years there has not been one single claim of this nature against the council. With the lessons learned we intend to make sure this is will be the first and last such case,” he added.

Comments(10)

sammydarlo says...
3:21am Sat 16 Mar 13

According to details released by her solicitor Stephen Jackson, Mrs Thacker, 63, was suspended in October 2010 when a member of the public claimed she had persuaded his elderly bother, a resident at the unit, to set up a bank account to allow her to steal money from him.

So shouldn't the member of the public (as mentioned in the story) who reported this in the first place be the one who is sued? According to the police no such account existed so it was a false allegation so they are responsible - maybe the council should sue for their money back as its due to this false allegation that all of this happened. Why should (ultimately) the tax payers of that council be the ones paying compensation for a false allegation made by someone else?

Dankeschon says...
6:32am Sat 16 Mar 13

The council will have insurance that indemnifies them against legal losses. I doubt tax payers would notice any change.

Davy Crocket says...
8:50am Sat 16 Mar 13

No insurance will cover losses like this. It will have clauses which effectively say stupidity is excluded. Yep its the over milked council tax payers who will be paying for this one way or another. The council leaders salaries, gold plated pensions and bonuses will be unaffected im sure.

vercingetorix says...
10:36am Sat 16 Mar 13

Richmondshire District Council takes it care of the elderly very serioisly ....................
.......????.........
............bullsh** !

Lancelot says...
3:25pm Sat 16 Mar 13

Make the bungling Councillors pay the £600,000.

spragger says...
8:45pm Sat 16 Mar 13

The big question is why do we need North Yorkshire County Council, Richmond Town Council & the incompetent Richmondshire District Council

- A level of Government too far. .

spangle32 says...
8:25am Sun 17 Mar 13

sammydarlo wrote:
According to details released by her solicitor Stephen Jackson, Mrs Thacker, 63, was suspended in October 2010 when a member of the public claimed she had persuaded his elderly bother, a resident at the unit, to set up a bank account to allow her to steal money from him.

So shouldn't the member of the public (as mentioned in the story) who reported this in the first place be the one who is sued? According to the police no such account existed so it was a false allegation so they are responsible - maybe the council should sue for their money back as its due to this false allegation that all of this happened. Why should (ultimately) the tax payers of that council be the ones paying compensation for a false allegation made by someone else?
Hear Hear! The member of the public who made this claim should be counter sued, americana if I ever heard it. Where the is a claim there is blame eh? The person who made the original claim should be publicised after all with the encouraged whistle blowing culture that is been developed the whistle blowers that are wrong should be made public!

opinionsmatter1 says...
11:25am Sun 17 Mar 13

And more to the point, did the Police ask any questions of the member of the public who first reported this? It is a common notion, that it is often those who commit the crime who point the finger at others to divert the attention from themselves.

Yanster says...
11:56am Sun 17 Mar 13

Perhaps this case would not appear so unique to RDC and the rest of us if others have had the courage of their convictions to come forward.

Callaghan1 says...
2:09pm Wed 27 Mar 13

Sammydarlo..
Well the council could have quite easily have reinstated after finding out the claim was false, and all would have been forgotten..but they did not, and continued to put Mrs Thacker through hell.. they need to learn to do their jobs properly! they just get board, they will soon find someone else to pick on. This article isn't even 100th of the story.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree