The Suffolk Hyde Affair - Doc 281 FBU Recall Conference 2006

Interested in other Suffolk Firefighter tales and brigade social history then check out "Lowestoft Fire Station 999” http://www.blogomonster.com/bertwrentham/

For a rapid scroll back to the beginning link to
http://thesuffolkhydeaffair.blogspot.com/


Suffolk County Council

Fire Service

A Wigglesworth Esq
Lowestoft Fire Station
Lowestoft
NR32 2QA
KES/DISC/Hyde/MLA
ACFO Seager
(01473) 588939
8th July 1999



Dear Mr Wigglesworth,

FIRE SERVICES (DISCIPLINE) REGULATIONS, 1985

Thank you for your letter dated 17th June. I believe you were aware that I was on annual leave at the time. I am now in a position to be able to reply.

Firstly, an apology. You are correct, of course, in pointing out that your letter of 4th June is not related to the case against Mr Hyde. I apologise that the reply you received assumed that the letter was about the Hyde case. I am sure you will understand that the amount of correspondence from you I have had to deal with has caused this error. I will reply separately to your questions about your grievance, currently suspended, once I have taken advice on how best to proceed.

I am puzzled by the terminology you use in the fourth paragraph of your letter of 17th June. It would be very helpful if you could use plain English so that I could better understand the points you make.

Notwithstanding, I believe you are challenging my reply to the letter of 5th June. Again, much confusion stems from the terminology you insist on using which I believe does not help matters at all.

Let me state as plainly as I can: I do not believe that I am required to divulge the name of the complainant as you continue to insist that I do. I refer you once again to page two of the Guidance to the Fire Services (Discipline) Regulations, 1985, paragraph seven, which spells out the three basic requirements of natural justice in Employment Law. I repeat, again, I believe I have acted throughout in compliance with the three stated principles. If you disagree, you must put your concerns before the Presiding Officer on 20th July for him to decide the matter.

On the matter of the documents, I can confirm that all the documents served on Mr Hyde with the Charge sheet remain available to the Presiding Officer to use in presenting the Brigade’s case. The service of supporting documents following the issue of a charge sheet is dealt with on page nine of the same Guidance referred to earlier. Again I repeat, I believe I have acted throughout in compliance with the Guidance given.

One final point. It is arrogant of you to assume anything about agreement, or otherwise, between us. I am prepared to stand by my decisions in this case, but only where those decisions have been explicitly expressed in writing to you.


Yours sincerely




K. E. Seager,
Assistant Chief Fire Officer (Technical)
Brigade Investigating Officer