Szabolcs Fekete, a banker from the United States of America, lost his lawsuit against Citibank for paying for lunch with his partner and then lying about it.
When he was fired in 2022 for serious misconduct, he had falsely claimed that he and his partner had two coffees, two sandwiches, and two pastas. He also claimed that the bank had treated him unfairly.
During a business trip to Amsterdam, Fekete asserted that he alone had consumed two sandwiches, two cups of coffee, and two pasta dishes. He later acknowledged, though, that he and his companion had eaten some meals together.
Fekete, a financial crime analyst at the bank for seven years, traveled to Amsterdam for business between July 3 and July 5, 2022.
When he got back to London, he submitted an expense report for food and drink that he thought was covered by the bank’s €100 (£86.70) daily allowance.
The boss he presented his claim to, though, questioned whether he had consumed all of the food and beverages he was asking for reimbursement for.
“I was traveling alone for business and I had two coffees because they were so little.
“On that day, I only drank one coffee in the morning and skipped breakfast. I ate one sandwich with a drink and a coffee for lunch at the restaurant, brought another coffee with me to the office, and then I ate the second sandwich in the afternoon—which also happened to be my dinner. “
The €100 daily allowance covers all of my expenses. I don’t think I need to justify my eating habits to this extent, so could you please explain what your concern is, Fekete said in an email exchange that was referenced in the employment tribunal’s decision.
Fekete was fired as a result of the bank’s security and investigations services department receiving a report about the incident. Fekete filed a lawsuit against the bank alleging unfair and unlawful dismissal.
Caroline Illing, the Employment Judge, decided in Citibank’s favor.
“I have discovered that this case is not about the dollar amounts at stake. The filing of the expense claim and the claimant’s subsequent actions are at issue in this case.
“It is significant that the claimant did not at the first opportunity make a full and frank disclosure and that he did not directly respond to questions. “.
“The claimant worked for an international financial institution in a position of trust.
“I am convinced that even if the expense claim had been submitted erroneously, the claimant had a responsibility to acknowledge the error and make amends as soon as possible. I acknowledge that the respondent expects honesty from its employees, said Judge Illing.
A spokesperson for the bank responded to the decision by saying, “We are pleased with the decision. “
