FORMER Coutts banker Paul Scott was wrongfully dismissed from the company, a tribunal has ruled.

The decision brings to an end a “year of hell” for the 42-year-old, a prominent figure in the Liverpool business community, who was fired from the Queen’s bank last summer in a dispute over payments relating to a disastrous trip to the 2007 European Cup final.

Mr Scott’s clients at Coutts included the region’s wealthiest people, such as Premiership footballers.

An industrial tribunal has ruled that Mr Scott was both unfairly and wrongfully sacked, and that he in no way contributed to the dismissal.

He is now awaiting a date for a further hearing at which the level of compensation will be set.

He was sacked in July, 2007, after an investigation into a trip he had organised for 147 people to the Liverpool v AC Milan European Cup final in Athens in May.

“I had organised a party to fly to Istanbul for the 2005 final at which everyone had a great time, so I thought I would do the same again,” Mr Scott told the Daily Post.

“In the end I paid for 147 seats on the plane for Athens and the arrangement was that everybody would pay me back. Although some of the people on the trip were Coutts clients, it was a purely private arrangement.

“I made no profit from the trip at all and the money I did get didn’t even cover the costs.”

The cost to each individual had worked out at around £500 a head, and they paid back Mr Scott mostly by either cash or card.

Four of the travellers in the party, all clients of Mr Scott, opted to pay the money directly into his personal Coutts account via a process known as the Clearing House Automated Payment System or CHAPS.

Those clients included wealthy business people and a Premiership footballer.

The usual fee for such a transaction is £25, but Mr Scott told them that, as they were valued clients, he was happy to waive the fee.

He added: “We have some very high-value clients at Coutts, and in terms of the CHAPS fee we were talking about a very small amount of money.

“My target was to bring in around £250,000 worth of business a year and waiving a fee like this is the kind of thing we would do for the clients. We actually had discretion to waive fees up to £100.”

The trip to Athens had proved to be a bit of a disaster. The match itself had been badly organised and many Liverpool supporters with legitimate tickets were unable to gain entry to the game because others had pushed their way into the ground. Outside the stadium, trouble had flared up and some fans found themselves on the receiving end of police batons.

When Mr Scott’s party returned to the airport to catch their flight home, the plane did not show up and people were forced to make alternative arrangements. And, to round off an all-round dreadful night, Liverpool lost.

A few weeks later, on June 21, Mr Scott was pulled aside by manager Paul Chester at the Princes Dock office and asked about the Athens trip and how it was funded. In particular, he wanted to know about the waiving of the CHAPS fees.

Mr Chester raised concerns that his actions in relation to the waiving of the fees were a potential conflict of interest.

Mr Scott said: “They told me they considered my actions amounted to a potential breach of procedure and I was immediately suspended. I had my phone and my computer taken off me and I was escorted off the premises.”

ON JULY 3, Mr Scott attended a disciplinary hearing in Manchester presided over by two Coutts executives – Keith Bramwell, who had travelled up from London, and Amanda Gwilliam from the bank’s Preston operation.

Issues highlighted at the hearing included the waiving of the CHAPS fees, the use of Mr Chester’s assistant in preparing a spreadsheet for the Athens trip and an arrangement that saw some people collect their plane tickets from the Coutts Liverpool office.

Mr Scott claimed at the hearing and at the subsequent tribunal that the use of the assistant had been agreed with Mr Chester. He also pointed out that Coutts had auctioned two tickets for the Athens plane at a charity event so were well aware the trip was taking place.

However, the bank concluded that Mr Scott’s actions amounted to gross misconduct and he was dismissed.

Within weeks of his sacking, he had landed a job developing new business for Liverpool-based property finance firm GB Finance.

However, Mr Scott felt his sacking was unwarranted and his reputation unfairly tarnished. He had helped set up the Coutts office in Liverpool in 2003 and was proud of the work he had done in firmly establishing the bank’s local presence.

As a personal banker with Coutts, it was his job to be out and about, meeting and looking after his wealthy clients. He was often to be found in the city’s trendiest bars and restaurants, but also found time to raise thousands of pounds for charities including Claire House.

The official line was that his parting from the bank had been amicable. But, in the almost claustrophobic atmosphere of Liverpool’s business community, the rumour mill was already doing its worst with people openly speculating over the circumstances of his departure.

“They have put me through 15 months of hell,” added Mr Scott. “I think they treated me so unfairly and damaged my integrity.”

THE tribunal sat at the beginning of September this year but has only delivered its judgment in the last few days. In its judgment, the tribunal pointed out that Mr Scott should have consulted his manager about the waiving of the CHAPs fees, but added this did not amount to gross misconduct.

The judgment reads: “It was undoubtedly the case that Mr Scott had a discretion to waive such fees and the purpose of the waiver was clear. The company would not wish to upset a client who had brought or could bring substantial business to it by charging a relatively trivial fee.

“Or, to put the matter more positively, the company could see that there would be occasions upon which its image would be improved in the eyes of such customers.

“Mr Scott had waived such fees on numerous occasions before. What made this situation different from the company’s point of view was that the money was going into a personal account for a trip that he had organised on a personal basis.”

It later added: “We did not believe a reasonable employer could conclude that these were serious acts of misconduct at all.

“Our conclusion, therefore, is that the company acted unreasonably in treating Mr Scott’s conduct and/or capability as warranting his dismissal and therefore the dismissal was unfair.”

Mr Scott now awaits the hearing that will decide the level of compensation. Tribunal awards for unfair dismissal are capped at just under £70,000, but he says the restoration of his reputation is much more important.

“I have had fantastic support from people over the past year,” he added. “People from within Coutts and Royal Bank of Scotland (Coutts is part of RBS/Natwest) have been behind me, as have numerous former clients.”

Mike Norfolk, head of private banking at Coutts, said in a statement: “As a matter of policy we do not comment on staff matters. However, Coutts expects all staff to deliver a high standard of service.”

tonymcdonough