The leader of a Somerset council will remain in her post after surviving a vote of new confidence following a scandal surrounding one of its senior officers.

Clare Pestell served as director of commercial and income generation for South Somerset District Council, and at one point was in line to become the new interim chief executive.

She left the council in October 2021 following an independent investigation into her conduct, denying a string of allegations made against her.

At a full council meeting held in Yeovil on February 28, council leader Val Keitch survived a vote of no confidence against her – meaning she will now remain in her post until the council is replaced by the new unitary authority in April 2023.

Councillor Martin Wale, who leads the opposition Conservative group on the council, introduced the motion while attending the meeting virtually while on holiday in Tenerife.

He said: “I was called upon in November to chair the appeal hearing for Clare Pestell, and it became apparent when we had all the papers that the allegations which are held within this motion were known to this council before the recommendations to the appointments committee and to all of us as councillors back in May.

“I would have brought this forward whatever party I was with, because we as a council have been misled and misinformed on the appointment of that chief executive.

“It is obvious that the allegations are serious criminal allegations and they were not reported in a proper manner for over six months.

“This matter has been poorly handled – it has been covered up, and all of us have been misled and misinformed for whatever reason over the suitability of this one selected candidate. I was astonished when I read the papers, as a long-serving councillor, that we had been treated this way.”

In a lengthy statement to the full council, Ms Keitch responded that it had taken time to establish whether the whistleblowing letter received by the council in April 2021 was genuine.

She said: “The timeline is the key factor here. It’s been suggested that the police should have been involved earlier. Let me point out to you all that the anonymous letter could have been vindictive or vexatious.

“When you get an anonymous letter, you have no idea until you carry out an inquiry whether there is truth in it. I was very keen all the way through that we did the right thing, and instigated a full internal inquiry.

“At this stage [April 2021], Mrs Pestell seemed not to be a major player, and another member of staff was much more heavily implicated. At this point, I had no reason to suggest that Mrs Pestell should not be considered for the post of chief executive officer.”

Ms Keitch claimed Mrs Pestell had been the only applicant when the chief executive role was advertised internally, and that the council’s appointments committee had agreed in May 2021 that she was “a suitable candidate” for the post – a decision which the full council approved that same month.

She went on: “On June 1, an interim report from the South West Audit Partnership (SWAP) cast doubt on that appointment. The offer was immediately withdrawn and Mrs Pestell was immediately signed off work.

“Questions were put to her and answered in writing by her- that takes time, a lot longer than having someone in front of you.

“The conclusion was reached that there was evidence of wrongdoing, and a disciplinary hearing was convened for October 8. I chaired that meeting – Mrs Pestell did not attend and requested an adjournment of one month.

“I was very unhappy with that, and the panel agreed with me, because in the intervening time Mrs Pestell had actually tendered her resignation, and her last day of employment with us would have been October 9.

“We agreed to adjourn for a week and we reconvened on October 15. The panel agreed, after hearing from our current chief executive and independent advisor, that there had been gross misconduct and summary dismissal was the only option.”

Mrs Pestell lost a subsequent appeal against the council’s ruling, with Ms Keitch stating that it was “always our intention” to pass the information onto the police once the council’s own procedures had been followed.

She concluded: “I want to stress at no time did I mislead this council – I followed the correct procedures at all times.

“Had I had the SWAP report earlier, possibly things might have been different – but I didn’t. I acted properly in the circumstances.

“I’m saddened to see this council described by certain members of the press as corrupt. That reflects not just on me but all of our staff, and I need to reassure them of my faith in them and [my] commitment to them all.

“The key here is when we discovered corruption, we acted properly and took the appropriate action. Anonymous letters are insidious, and I suspect had we sent that to the police on day one, they would not have been interested.”

The motion of no confidence ended up failing by a margin of eight votes to 30, with one councillor abstaining from the vote.

Following this decision, council chairman Paul Maxwell remarked: “I have got absolutely every faith in Val as the leader of this council, as a long-term colleague and [as a] friend.”