A SCOTS carer has been issued with a warning after it was found she accepted nearly £400 in payments from a care user.
Lynn Langford was given a warning by regulator Scottish Social Services Council (SSSC) yesterday, which will remain on her registration for 36 months.
Langford from Larkhall, Lanarkshire, was employed at a care home in Lanark where she accepted money and gifts from the unnamed resident across several months from September 2020 to May 2021.
Langford was also found to have added and spoke to the user on Facebook, and was deemed as having ‘failed to cooperate’ when her employer investigated the matter.
The charges stated that: “We decided there is evidence that while employed as a support worker in Lanark, and during the course of your employment, you did, on an unknown date prior to June 2021, provide service user AA with details of your bank account.
“On 28 April 2021, 30 April 2021, 5 May 2021, 9 May 2021 and other specific dates unknown to the SSSC, [you did] accept payments amounting to the sum of £300 from AA via your colleague ZZ’s PayPal account.
“On 10 May 2021 [you did] accept a bank transfer from AA of £50, and accept a bank transfer from AA of £30.
“On a specific date unknown to the SSSC, [you did] send AA a friend request on social media site Facebook.
“[You did] breach professional boundaries with AA by sending regular messages to AA using Facebook Messenger requesting money or discussing money.
“On unknown dates after 5 June 2021, [you did] fail to cooperate with your employer’s investigation into the matters described above.
“On an unknown date, after 19 September 2020 and prior to 11 June 2021, [you did] accept a pair of trainers from AA.”
The SSSC agreed that Langford’s fitness to practice was impaired, stating: “By accepting several payments from service user AA amounting to £380 you have exploited a vulnerable service user for your own financial gain.
“Sending AA a friend request on Facebook, corresponding with AA via Facebook messenger and accepting a pair of trainers from AA amounts to a breach of professional boundaries.
“Your behaviour demonstrates that you have formed an inappropriate relationship with AA, as you have potentially created an unrealistic expectation that all social service workers will communicate in this way.
“Social service workers should cooperate with any investigation by their employer, the SSSC or another authority into their fitness to practise.
“By not responding to your employer’s request for information into the allegations of financial harm by AA, you failed to engage in your employer’s investigation process.”
They agreed that Langford had acknowledged what she had done wrong and that the appropriate sanction was to place a warning on her registration for a period of 36 months.
Langford will also need to complete learning and provide evidence of this to the SSSC.
