Introduction
In special circumstances, employers may decide to provide financial assistance to employees, such as reimbursement of expenses related to specific personal circumstances. But what if such an allowance is not spent for its intended purpose? In a recent ruling, an employee was summarily dismissed because he systematically misused the allowance to pay for a dog-walking service. The judge ruled that trust had been seriously breached. This blog discusses the case and the legal considerations.
The Case: Compensation for a Dog-Walking Service
An account manager received additional support from his employer after his personal circumstances changed due to a divorce. The employee’s dog was staying in his apartment, but walking the dog was difficult to coordinate with his work schedule. To accommodate the employee, the employer provided a monthly expense allowance of €108, intended to cover the cost of a dog-walking service.
This arrangement was made exclusively for this employee and was explicitly linked to the care of the dog through a professional service.
What went wrong?
Initially, the allowance was used correctly. Over time, however, the employee stopped using the dog-walking service, while the monthly allowance continued to be paid. It was not until months later that the employer discovered that the service had not been used since December, even though the allowance had been paid out.
When confronted with this, the employee explained that he had used the money to buy gifts for friends and family members as a thank-you for walking his dog. The employer did not accept this explanation and decided to terminate the employee’s employment immediately.
The judge’s ruling
The subdistrict court ruled in favor of the employer and found that the summary dismissal was legally valid. Among other factors, the court took the following into consideration:
- The expense reimbursement was strictly intended for an outside dog-walking service.
- For six months, the employee had deliberately failed to follow these instructions.
- He had not communicated this on his own initiative.
- When confronted with the facts, he gave an evasive explanation without showing any remorse or being fully candid.
The judge emphasized that transparency and honesty are core values in an employment relationship. Particularly in the case of an individual arrangement based on trust, abuse of such an arrangement can be considered seriously culpable conduct.
An Important Lesson for Employees
This ruling underscores that employees must handle expense reimbursements with care, especially when they are granted for a specific purpose. Using the reimbursement for alternative purposes—no matter how well-intentioned—is, in principle, not permitted without consultation with or permission from the employer.
Employees are advised to report any changes in how they use their allowance in a timely and complete manner. When in doubt, it is advisable to ask for explicit permission to avoid disputes or penalties.
Conclusion
An expense allowance is not a discretionary perk, but a purpose-specific arrangement based on trust. Failure to comply with the intended purpose may constitute serious misconduct, potentially resulting in immediate termination. This case makes it clear that even when relatively small amounts are involved, the standards of honesty and transparency carry significant weight in the legal assessment.
This blog was written by Stijn Blom, Esq., an employment law attorney at Arbeidsadvocaat.nl B.V. Stijn has extensive experience in employment law and assists employers and employees on a daily basis with a wide range of employment law issues. From dismissal cases to drafting watertight agreements and policies—with his practical and personalized approach, he helps employers and employees move forward. Want to learn more? Visit Stijn’s page.
Arbeidsadvocaat.nl is happy to help you if you have any questions about expense reimbursement. Please feel free to contact us .
April 2025