Bank teller fired over US$50 school fees fraud

for their children.
Barclays Bank requested the workers to submit school fees invoices to enable it to facilitate payment of the fees.
Chamu Mushambainza obtained an invoice from Goromonzi High School in respect of his child who was not going to that school but was at St David’s Bonda Girls’ High School and submitted it to his employer.
He admitted that he got the invoice from his friend and inscribed his daughter’s name on the invoice, before submitting it in support of the school fees claim.
Mushambainza presented the fraudulent invoice claiming US$450 school fees while also misrepresenting the amount as the total school fees payable for his daughter was US$400.
Barclays Bank paid him the fees claim on the basis of the submitted documents.
The bank later realised that Mushambainza’s child was not at Goromonzi and charged him with misconduct.
He was found guilty and dismissed.
The matter was referred to the Appeals Board of the National Employment Council for the banking industry who also found him guilty and upheld the dismissal.
Aggrieved by the dismissal, Mushambainza sought recourse through the Labour Court arguing that the NEC erred in failing to realise that there was no intention to defraud the bank. He submitted that the NEC further misdirected itself in failing to take into account that the money received were used to pay school fees for his child, albeit at St David’s Bonda Girls’ High School.
Mushambainza further argued that the NEC erred in failing to consider any mitigatory factors.
Labour Court president Ms Lilian Hove noted that no procedural grounds were raised in the notice and grounds of appeal.
Ms Hove said: “It is improper therefore to raise issues that have not been raised in the notice of appeal in the heads of arguments as the appellant did in his heads of arguments.
“Mushambainza did not deny that he had presented to the bank an invoice obtained from a friend and not from the school.”
She pointed out that what he did was clearly a fraudulent activity.
Ms Hove said fraud is defined as wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain.
Ms Hove was of the view that fraud was proved, as Mushambainza acted with the intention to misrepresent the facts and defraud the employer.
She was satisfied that the NEC did not err in the manner alleged in the grounds of appeal.
Ms Hove dismissed Mushambainza’s appeal for lack of merit.