A housing officer with Dublin City Council who claims her home was fire-bombed and her mobile phone hacked after she queried a colleague’s allocation of housing has sued for damages in the High Court.
Teresa Conlon is suing the council over alleged breach of duty and intentional or reckless infliction of mental suffering.
The case was outlined yesterday by John O’Donnell SC, for Ms Conlon, when he secured an adjournment to next month to facilitate a key medical witness.
Mr O’Donnell said Ms Conlon was an exemplary employee who had discovered a “fraudulent” housing allocation within Dublin City Council in 2007 and asked for that to be investigated. The employee concerned then launched a “vindictive grievance” complaint but lost, after which an appeals process took place.
Mr O’Donnell said the matter escalated when a report containing an “incorrect ancillary finding” was leaked to the media and Ms Conlon’s mobile phone was hacked. His client was put under significant stress, her house was fire-bombed and her car was set on fire.
Mark Connaughton SC, said the council denied the claims.
Letter of complaint
It is claimed in court documents that Ms Conlon, an administrative officer in the housing department, was on September 28th, 2007, the subject of a 17-page letter of complaint and grievance submitted by a fellow employee.
The complaint followed her own request that a housing allocation by the complainant be investigated, she claims.
The complainant’s grievance was investigated and it was determined there was no basis for it. It was also decided that no investigation was warranted of another complaint made by another colleague in relation to Ms Conlon, it is alleged.
Both complainants appealed the decisions, external investigators were appointed in May 2008 and the process lasted more than seven months, Ms Conlon claims, with the investigations and reports cost in excess of €150,000.
Ms Conlon claims she had a number of times highlighted her dissatisfaction with the manner in which the appeal investigation was being conducted and claimed the grievances were motivated by malice.
Despite highlighting the detrimental effect the investigation was having on her health, the appeal investigations continued, she claims.
In relation to her own complaint over the housing allocation, she claims it was found the employee concerned had a case to answer as to how that employee was involved in the allocation of specific accommodation. The complaints against her were not upheld, she added.
Although there was an incorrect ancillary finding relating to management in the housing allocations section being accountable in respect of a certain file, the council failed to amend the final report, she also alleges.
Subject of scrutiny
She claims the report was leaked to the media and, due to a failure to correct the incorrect finding, she had become the subject of intense scrutiny and investigations by a number of public representatives.
She also claims the council has recordings of some of her mobile phone conversations and did not tell her or seek to deal with the issue.
An alleged failure to conduct the appeal investigation discreetly caused her to feel stressed and menaced in the course of her employment, it is also claimed.