Charity cake sale raised funds but not proof: dismissal for gross misconduct upheld
A Force Control Room Operator was fairly dismissed after failing to provide proof of a charity donation from a cake sale, the tribunal has ruled. No compensation was awarded.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #charity-fundraising
- #dishonesty
- #failure-to-provide-evidence
- #gross-misconduct
- #police-staff
Key facts
- The claimant organised a charity cake sale for Macmillan Cancer Support in October 2018.
- When asked to provide proof of donation in August 2019, she failed to do so and gave varying accounts.
- The claimant was summarily dismissed on 11 January 2021 for gross misconduct.
- The tribunal found that the employer had a genuine belief in the claimant's misconduct based on a reasonable investigation.
- The dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses.
Timeline
-
Charity cake sale
The claimant held a charity cake sale at work for Macmillan Cancer Support.
-
First request for proof of donation
Line manager Ms Botley asked the claimant for proof of the charity donation.
-
Second request for proof
Ms Botley again asked the claimant for proof; the claimant mentioned a figure of £160 and said the certificate had gone missing.
-
Text message to colleague
The claimant texted David Bell saying the Macmillan issue was 'sorted' and she was waiting for a certificate.
-
Warrant executed and notice of investigation
Police executed a search warrant at the claimant's home; she was served with a notice of investigation for failing to provide evidence of donation.
-
Criminal interview
The claimant attended a criminal interview, gave a prepared statement, and answered no comment.
-
CPS decides no further action
The CPS decided not to pursue criminal charges; the conduct investigation resumed.
-
Gross misconduct hearing and dismissal
The disciplinary hearing found the claimant guilty of gross misconduct; she was summarily dismissed.
-
Appeal hearing
The appeal hearing chaired by Mr Rutherford upheld the dismissal.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the employer acted reasonably in dismissing the claimant for gross misconduct when she failed to provide evidence of a charity donation after repeated requests.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed the claim of unfair dismissal, finding that Surrey Police acted reasonably throughout.
Key reasons:
- The employer had a genuine belief in the misconduct based on a reasonable investigation.
- The decision to dismiss was within the range of reasonable responses.
- The appeal process was fair and upheld the dismissal.
No compensation was awarded as the claim was unsuccessful.
Lessons & takeaways
- Keep records of charity donations and provide proof promptly when asked, especially in a role requiring trust and integrity.
- Employers can fairly dismiss for conduct if they have a genuine belief based on reasonable grounds and a reasonable investigation.
- A fair appeal process can strengthen the employer's case at tribunal.
- Personal circumstances, such as health issues, may be considered but do not automatically make a dismissal unfair.
When a charity cake sale led to dismissal
A Force Control Room Operator with four years' service at Surrey Police was dismissed for gross misconduct after failing to provide proof of a charity donation. The cake sale, held in October 2018 for Macmillan Cancer Support, raised funds but the operator could not produce a donation certificate when asked nearly a year later.
Despite multiple requests from her line manager and a police investigation, the operator gave varying accounts and eventually said the certificate had gone missing. The disciplinary hearing found this amounted to gross misconduct, and her appeal was rejected.
What the employer did right
The tribunal noted that Surrey Police carried out a reasonable investigation, including a criminal inquiry that ultimately led to no charges. The decision-maker had a genuine belief in the misconduct, and the dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses. The appeal hearing was also conducted fairly.
What this means for similar cases
This case shows that employers can fairly dismiss for conduct even when no criminal charges are brought, as long as the internal process is thorough and the decision is reasonable. For employees, it highlights the importance of keeping clear records and responding promptly to requests for information, especially in roles where honesty is critical.
Similar cases
Packing operator dismissed for leaving early without permission: dismissal fair despite inconsistent colleague treatment
An employment tribunal has upheld the dismissal of a packing operator with 11 years' service who left work early without authorisation and was found to have been dishonest about his start time. No compensation was awarded.
Dismissed for keeping commission overpayments he knew were not due: employer acted fairly
A commercial development executive with 8 years' service was fairly dismissed after he failed to report three commission overpayments totalling £6,049.83 that he knew he was not entitled to. The tribunal rejected his unfair dismissal claim.
Dismissed for stealing diesel: procedural flaws made it unfair
A Highways Maintenance Operative was unfairly dismissed after admitting to stealing diesel, but the tribunal found the investigation and disciplinary process were procedurally flawed.
Dismissed for dishonest call to employer's solicitors: union convener loses unfair dismissal claim
A warehouse operative and union convener was fairly dismissed after falsely claiming to be a union member's representative when calling the employer's solicitors. The tribunal rejected his claims of automatic and ordinary unfair dismissal.