Exclusive: 5 Villages Group chairman Don Iro denies allegations and says no finding was ever made against him after an internal process was left unfinished.
A sexual harassment grievance made against the chairman of Candidsky’s parent company triggered an internal HR process that ultimately ended without reaching a formal conclusion, Prolific North can reveal.
The process followed a complaint made by a Candidsky employee in July 2025, around two months after the Manchester digital agency was acquired by 5 Villages Group.
Prolific North has reviewed the written grievance, HR correspondence, internal emails, WhatsApp messages and audio recordings submitted as part of the process.
The complainant will not be identified for legal reasons. Throughout this investigation, Prolific North has taken steps to protect her anonymity.
The grievance alleged “repeated instances of sexual harassment, coercive behaviour, and gross abuse of power” by 5 Villages Group chairman Don Iro.
Iro unequivocally denies sexually harassing the employee or behaving improperly towards her in any way.
The grievance
The written grievance alleges that on 1 July 2025, the employee attended what she believed was a business dinner with Iro before returning with him to the hotel where he was staying.
According to the grievance, the evening became increasingly inappropriate. It states: “After repeatedly encouraging alcohol consumption and steering conversation toward sexual topics, he led me to his hotel room, where further highly inappropriate comments, sexual questioning, and coercive behaviour occurred.”
The grievance continues: “I refused to engage with multiple sexual suggestions, which did not seem to deter Donald, who at one point took things as far as to ask about my pubic hair. He also invited me into his bed, and subjected me to commentary of a fetishistic and deeply inappropriate nature.”
It further alleges that Iro later asked the employee not to tell anyone about the evening and subsequently sent messages describing her as a “good girl” and inviting her to “mix business with pleasure.”
The grievance also alleges: “I was guided to Donald’s hotel room under misleading pretences and made to feel unsafe and cornered. He stated phrases such as ‘the night is still young’ and later pressured me to keep the evening secret, explicitly saying I shouldn’t tell anyone and to ‘curtsey’ when I saw him, conduct which I found threatening and manipulative.”
It adds: “The professional consequences were implied throughout, including references to multiple income streams, how Donald could ‘help’ me, and requests to ‘mix business with pleasure.’”
The complaint was supported by what the grievance described as screenshots, WhatsApp conversations, LinkedIn messages, location-sharing records, voice recordings and a chronology of events.
Prolific North has reviewed a substantial body of documentary and audio material relating to the complaint.
HR process launched
Emails seen by Prolific North show Candidsky acknowledged the grievance and commenced an HR process.
Then-chief executive David Vernon, who left the company in March of this year, told the employee she could remain on paid leave while the investigation continued.
At the time, he wrote: “Whilst the investigation continues, we’re happy to approve for you to be on paid leave until the investigation is complete. We want to ensure we’re doing everything we can in the meantime to make sure you’re comfortable, so hopefully this helps somewhat.”
A subsequent email from Candidsky’s HR adviser said an initial review of the evidence had been completed.
They wrote: “I want to reassure you that we’re treating this matter with the seriousness and care it deserves. As you’ll appreciate, this is a complex situation due to the position of the individual involved and we are being particularly mindful to handle things properly and fairly for everyone involved.”
The email continued: “In terms of process, the initial review of the evidence you submitted is now complete. The next step is to notify Donald of the allegations and invite him to respond – this will happen tomorrow afternoon. Following that, we may need to conduct a further investigation meeting, depending on what arises from his response.”
The email also acknowledged that the employee had raised the possibility of an alternative outcome, while stating that neither the HR adviser nor Vernon had authority to approve any financial or contractual arrangement without Iro’s involvement.
The employee later left Candidsky. Prolific North has not seen a completed investigation report or formal written outcome.
5 Villages Group has declined to disclose whether the employee’s departure was governed by a settlement agreement or another confidential arrangement.
5 Villages Group response
In three detailed responses to Prolific North, 5 Villages Group confirmed that an internal HR process took place but rejected any suggestion that it resulted in any finding against Iro.
The group said: “Mr Iro denies sexually harassing the former employee or acting towards her with any sexual or otherwise improper motive.”
According to the company, Iro arranged the meeting because he had received confidential information suggesting there was “a potential employment-related concern regarding an external activity undertaken by the employee.”
The group said: “With hindsight, Mr Iro accepts that it would have been more appropriate to refer the issue directly to HR and for any discussion to take place through a formal workplace process. He accepts that attempting to investigate the matter personally, and choosing that setting for the discussion, was an error of judgement.”
It added: “He nevertheless strongly denies that the meeting had a sexual purpose or that he sexually harassed or otherwise behaved improperly towards the employee.”
In a later response, the company said the confidential information had come from a personal contact and alleged it concerned conduct that could have brought Candidsky into disrepute.
The group also said the complainant had previously connected with Iro on LinkedIn and provided him with her mobile telephone number.
It said: “The meeting took place at a hotel, followed by dinner, after which the pair returned to the hotel, where Mr Iro arranged and paid for a taxi to take the complainant home. Mr Iro accepts, with hindsight, that this setting was not appropriate for a discussion of this nature.”
It added: “Notwithstanding those limitations, Mr Iro unequivocally denies that the meeting had any sexual purpose, and denies sexually harassing or otherwise behaving improperly towards the complainant, whether in the terms you describe or otherwise.”
The group declined to address the specific content described by Prolific North without being provided with the complete recordings, metadata and associated communications.
It said Iro understood the recordings had been made without his knowledge and was concerned that they could have been “edited, selectively presented, or separated from their surrounding context”.
Prolific North has not provided its confidential source material to the group. Detailed allegations were, however, put directly to the company and Iro during an extended right-of-reply process, which, to the Group’s credit, it engaged in.
No final finding
5 Villages Group said the HR process was internal rather than independent and did not reach a final determination.
It said Iro was contacted informally by the HR adviser via WhatsApp and provided his account of events but:
“i. he was not formally interviewed;
ii. he was not provided with a written statement setting out the allegations;
iii. he was not shown the evidence being considered;
iv. he was not invited to provide a formal written response; and
v. he was not provided with an investigation report or outcome.”
The company said: “Mr Iro was never informed that the allegation had been upheld. The Group has not presently identified a final investigation report or formal outcome establishing that any finding was made against him.”
It added: “Any suggestion that an independent investigation upheld the allegation, or that a concluded finding was made against Mr Iro, would therefore be inaccurate.”
The group said Iro was available and willing to participate in a formal investigation, but no formal interview was arranged.
In its latest response, it said: “Mr Iro is not aware of any formal HR investigation having been concluded, and is therefore not in a position to comment on the circumstances in which any such investigation may have ended, or whether it was discontinued in connection with the complainant’s departure.”
It added: “Mr Iro recalls informal contact from Candidsky’s HR adviser by WhatsApp, in which he provided his account of events. He does not recall receiving any communication from the HR adviser setting out provisional findings, and is not aware of any investigation report or outcome having been produced.”
Office attendance
Several former Candidsky employees told Prolific North it was their understanding that Iro would not attend the company’s offices following the HR complaint.
5 Villages Group denies that any formal restriction was imposed. However, in one response it said: “Mr Iro recalls an informal suggestion that he should avoid attending Candidsky’s offices while the matter ‘blew over’, and he agreed to follow that suggestion.”
It also said: “He subsequently received a message from a member of management stating that he should not attend the office because of unspecified ‘issues’.”
In a subsequent response, the company added: “Mr Iro recalls that, when he attended the office some time later to oversee a new interim appointment, several members of staff, both male and female, left the office. He was told in passing that this was because certain staff felt uncomfortable, but he was not told that this was connected to the earlier events, nor what those individuals were said to be uncomfortable about.”
5 Villages Group said it would be misleading to characterise this as a formal restriction following an upheld complaint because no investigation reached a formal conclusion.
The company stressed: “The Group takes any allegation of harassment or inappropriate workplace conduct very seriously. The current leadership is committed to building a culture founded on respect, professionalism and inclusivity, in which employees feel able to raise concerns and can expect those concerns to be considered appropriately.”
In addition to reviewing the contemporaneous documents, Prolific North has approached the complainant, the HR adviser involved in the process and other individuals connected to the events described in this article. 5 Villages Group and Don Iro were also given repeated opportunities over several weeks to respond in detail to the allegations and the documentary material relied upon in this reporting.
Prolific North put detailed allegations to 5 Villages Group over several rounds of correspondence extending across multiple weeks. The company was invited to respond to each significant allegation raised by sources and to provide any documentary material it believed contradicted the evidence reviewed by Prolific North.
Prolific North has published those responses throughout this report, which also carries verbatim responses from the Group, which it acknowledges has been forthcoming and candid in its replies which have been appropriately published for proper balance.
Tomorrow: How Candidsky went from promising to become “the best search and creative agency in the North” to tribunal claims, client losses and a major restructure in less than a year.
