The Suffolk Hyde Affair - Doc 144 Suffolk Retained Firemen

CDJ/FBU/F98/60224
Mr M Hyde
Lowestoft

By Post only

29th April, 1999

Dear Mr Hyde,

DISCIPLINE CHARGES AND LITIGATION IN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT

Thank you for your letter received by facsimile today.
Under the provisions of the Regulations, I am not entitled to represent you at a hearing before the Chief Officer. I can only provide advice to you and your accused’s friend, Mr Wigglesworth.

The letter to the DCFO is highly unlikely to result in the charges against you being dropped. It has been written principally with the intention of setting the Brigade up later for an accusation that they are discriminating against trade unionists. It has also been written with the firm intention of producing it at any appeal hearing before the Disciplinary Tribunal of the Fire Authority and the Secretary of state if necessary. No doubt DCFO Smith is taking advice on how to properly respond. Either that or he is simply ignoring it. If he wishes to do that then so be it, there is nothing I can do to prevent that.

With regard to the Chief hearing your case. I suggest that Mr Wigglesworth makes representations to the presenting officer about the appropriate forum for the hearing. My understanding was that the Chief had already been involved in this case and that the policy in Suffolk was that where there had been prior involvement in a case by the Chief Fire Officer, the matter was inappropriate for the Chief and was dealt with by the Disciplinary Tribunal of the Fire Authority. This needs to be set out in writing in a letter to the presenting officer well in advance of any hearing, with a warning that if the presenting officer insists on the Chief dealing with the matter, then you reserve the right to draw attention to that letter should it be necessary subsequently to appeal. It will be helpful if the letter explains the extent of the Chief’s involvement. Remember, there are two purposes to the letter, one to achieve the result the letter says is desired but two, to be put in front of any subsequent appeal panel.

I agree that orders and the service of papers should be dealt with direct with you. Mr Seager’s offer to copy me in correspondence is one that you should gratefully accept.

I suggest that you or Mr Wigglesworth write to Mr Seager in the following terms:
Thank you for your letter 27th April 1999. I am grateful for your offer to copy in Mr Jones with any correspondence relating to this matter and I accept that offer. I have told Mr Jones that he will hear from you from time to time.

However, I am concerned that this matter will be heard by the Chief Fire Officer. The Chief Fire officer already has prior knowledge of this matter in that he ……(details of the Chief Fire Officer’s previous involvement). That being so, I do not think he can fairly and independently hear this case under the provisions of the fire Services (Discipline) Regulations 1985. In the past, such circumstances have always led to the Disciplinary Tribunal of the fire authority hearing the case under regulation 9(2)(b) instead of the Chief Fire Officer. Will you please consider this and confirm whether you are prepared to arrange for this matter to be dealt with by the Disciplinary Tribunal of the Fire Authority. If you are not, can you please explain why not.

With regards to orders and statements, I am happy to accept both of these personally while on duty.

I reserve the right to refer this correspondence if it becomes necessary to appeal any decision.

No doubt you and Mr Wigglesworth can amend the letter as you see fit.

Yours sincerely

Craig Jones
For THOMPSONS