Evidence item D735
Letter from Manches (Keble's solicitors) to Diamond Versi, 28th April 2004

Our reference: DZR/DLW/013046/143868

Manches

Manches LLP
3 Worcester Street
Tel + 44 (0)1865 722106
Fax + 44 (0)1865 20 10 12
DX 4322 0xford
www.manches.com

Mr D Versi

28th April 2004

Dear Sir

Keble College

We are, as you know, instructed by Keble College in connection with matters relating to the termination of your employment. We understand from your telephone conversation with Julian Taylor of this office this morning that despite the indication in your e-mail of 23rd April that you do not wish to communicate with the College solicitors, you are in fact prepared to do so.

We enclose a cheque in the sum of £6,075 by way of the statutory redundancy payment. Please acknowledge receipt.

In our letter of 15th April 2004 we referred to three other payments that would be made to you following termination. You will receive via the payroll within the next few days the sum of £359.90 less tax and National Insurance contributions for the two days of your notice period you served. In addition, you will receive at the same time, your accrued but untaken holiday pay in the sum of £987.25 less tax and National Insurance contributions being 5.5 days holiday pay at the rate of £l79.95 a day.

However, the payment in lieu of the balance of your notice period in the sum of £9,526.01 will not be paid to you at this stage. This is because matters have come to light which may amount to a fundamental breach of your contract of employment which, had it been discovered prior to termination of employment, may have entitled the College to terminate your contract of employment without paying contractual notice. Consequently, it is imperative that you provide a full explanation of the issues set out below so that the College can consider the position on the basis of the best possible evidence.

The issues the College would like you to provide further information about are as follows:

1. On 22nd April the College received a telephone bill for the telephone line installed at your home for the conduct of College business only. This is something the Bursar had been unaware of prior to receiving the telephone bill on 22nd April. The bill covered the period 26th January to 18th April 2004 and was for £436.13 of which £386.62 was for cost of calls. You were on sick leave from 23rd February until the termination of your employment by reason of redundancy on 31st March. We attach a copy of the bill for your information. You will see that the bill included 270 hours of internet connection, 72 national calls, 18 international calls, 162 calls to a mobile phone and 3 premium rate calls. The College is in the process of obtaining a full breakdown of the bill. In the meantime please explain on what College business these costs were incurred.

2. Historically, it would appear that the quarterly bill for the above telephone line has been around £150 - £200. In the past, the authorisation for the payment of the bills was given by you. This is contrary to the College's well established policy, enforced by you, that employees should not authorise their own expenses. Please can you explain why it is that you authorised these expenses contrary to College policy.

3. On 22nd April you confirmed in an e-mail to the Warden that you no longer held any property belonging to the College. In the course of making enquiries about the telephone bill it has come to the College's attention that you still hold a computer, a monitor, a printer and a scanner belonging to the College.

The College believes these items belong to it for the following reasons:-

• The computer was purchased from Comet Data Marketing in September 1998. The cost excluding VAT was £l,766. It was charged to account number 520507 (admin computer costs).
• The monitor was purchased from Pars in May 2002. The cost was £264 excluding VAT. It was initially charged to account number 630092 (Senior Battels Misc). This is the route by which individuals are charged for purchases made on their behalf by the College. However, instead of this item being cleared by deduction from your salary it was on-charged to 520507 (admin computer costs) on 11th July 2002.
• The scanner was purchased from Technomatic/Microwarehouse in February 2003. The cost was £63 excluding VAT. £49.50 of this was charged to 520507 (admin computer costs) and the balance to 420111 (computer costs junior members).
• The College is awaiting clarification of the position in relation to the printer.

Please answer the following questions in relation to the above:

• Do you maintain that these items belong to you and not the College?
• If so, why?
• Please explain why the cost of the monitor was on-charged to 520507 (admin computer costs) rather than by way of a deduction from your salary?
• Provide details of any authority you had to purchase the monitor and to charge for it in the way that you did.
• Please explain why the charge for the scanner was split between 520507 (admin computer costs) and the balance to 420111 (computer costs junior members).

We look forward to hearing from you in writing dealing with the issues set out above. Please may we hear from you within 21 days of the date of this letter. In the event that you choose not to provide an explanation of the issues set out above by then, then the College will be left with no option other than to make a decision about whether to make a payment in lieu of notice in the absence of any explanation from you.

Finally, we enclose for your records your P45, P60 and final payslip.

Yours faithfully

Manches LLP