Treasury 'materially contributed' to suicide of employee Chloe Moffat

HM Treasury 'materially contributed' to the suicide of its employee Chloe Moffat when she took her own life following an anonymous complaint at work.

In announcing her conclusion of an inquest into Moffat's death at Surrey Coroners' Court, assistant coroner Anna Crawford found that the Treasury did not follow its disciplinary procedure in informing Moffat that the outcome of the allegation, if true, would be a written warning and not dismissal.

Crawford said there may be a "wider issue" in government and that she would send a Prevention of Future Deaths (PFD) report to the civil service, Treasury and Acas. Recipients of a PFD report must provide a written response within 56 days.

Moffat, 26, worked as a personal assistant for nearly three years and had been on track for promotion. After the Treasury received a number of anonymous complaints, managers invited Moffat to a meeting. The complaints alleged that Moffat had informally shared information about her colleagues, which Moffat denied.

The court heard that when Moffatt asked if she would be losing her job, a senior manager told her she "couldn't predict any outcome of any potential investigation".

Moffat had her job responsibilities temporarily changed and access to her manager's diary - despite the meeting being described as "informal".

Crawford said that, instead of calling Moffat into the meeting, attended by her line manager and the Treasury's head of global issues, she should have been given details of the allegations in a letter.

She added that Moffat's state of mind, being afraid that she would be dismissed, likely contributed to her decision to end her life.

The inquest heard that following the meeting on 19 May 2025, Moffat sent a text message to her friend that said: "I am going to be fired". The next day, Moffat was found dead by her father.

The court heard that the Treasury managers had followed advice given by HR, but the way the complaint was handled was not in line with policy.

The Treasury's policy, which is in line with Acas guidelines, states that serious misconduct allegations have to be handled formally, so that the person is "not deprived of their rights".

The coroner said this includes having a third party present during meetings, receiving five days' notice of meetings, and providing information on a likely outcome if allegations are upheld.

Treasury staff previously described the meeting as "informal" and "fact-finding", but internal emails revealed that they had already considered the level of misconduct as "serious".

'Sufficient information'

Crawford told the court that she believed the reason for the meeting was to see if Moffat would admit to the allegations so they could move to a formal disciplinary.

She added that before the meeting on 19 May, there was "sufficient information" available to determine the level of potential misconduct.

Ms Crawford said: "HM Treasury materially contributed to Ms Moffat's death by not applying their written discipline policy and procedure in that they did not inform her that the likely penalty, if the allegations were proven, was a written warning and not dismissal."

Crawford ruled that Moffat's death was a suicide and that she was satisfied in finding that Moffat had intended to take her own life.

In a statement, Moffat's parents said: "Chloe was a bright, caring and talented young woman who loved her family, her friends and her work. She had an exemplary employment record, was highly regarded by those who worked with her, and had a promising future ahead of her. As her family, we remain immensely proud of everything she achieved in her short life."

A Treasury spokesperson said: "We continue to mourn Chloe's passing as a colleague and friend. Our thoughts remain with her family and friends. We take the coroner's concerns extremely seriously and recognise it is important to act quickly. We are now considering the findings carefully.

"We have introduced improvements to guidance, support and wellbeing arrangements, but recognise we must continue to take action to prevent this happening again."

Disciplinary code of practice

Last month, Acas launched a consultation on a new draft Code of Practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures that places a much stronger emphasis on resolving workplace concerns informally before they escalate into formal processes.

The revised code, the first full update since 2009, seeks to encourage employers and workers to address concerns early through informal conversations, with Acas arguing that effective informal resolution can reduce costs, improve workplace relationships and prevent unnecessary conflict.

Commenting on the Moffat case, an Acas spokesperson said: "This is an extremely distressing and upsetting case and our thoughts are with Chloe's family. Acas has a disciplinary and grievance code of practice that sets out good practice advice for employers on how to handle disciplinary cases.

"Revisions to this code are currently being consulted on with a deadline for responses of 23 September. Our proposed revisions to the code include a new advice section for employers on how to handle concerns informally. We welcome any feedback on the revised code and will consider any recommendations for Acas from the coroner's report."

In July, the UK's Faculty of Public Health argued that poorly conducted workplace investigations cause such harm that they should be seen as a threat to public health. By putting formal ways of handling workplace issues ahead of staff wellbeing, employers could be causing "unintended harm" where investigations are "poorly conducted or applied excessively", it said.

The faculty called on policymakers, employers, HR, and public health professionals to recognise how disciplinaries can be a detriment to workforce wellbeing and ensure there are safeguards in regulation and policies.