Linden v Norfolk Fire and Rescue Service: 3301452/2024

“Seriously flawed” flawed investigation of fire service Station Manager

This case concerns the dismissal of Mr J. Linden, a long‑serving station manager with Norfolk Fire and Rescue Service, following an altercation on 14 June 2023 with a member of the public, Mr Evans, who was filming at the scene of a fire. Mr Evans accused Mr Linden of taking his mobile phone and throwing it into undergrowth. Although the tribunal ultimately found that Mr Linden probably did throw the phone, it nevertheless held that the dismissal was unfair because the employer’s investigation and disciplinary procedure were seriously flawed.

First, the investigation was conducted internally. The tribunal found it “inappropriate” that senior management interfered with the scope of his investigation from the outset. In particular, an email from the Chief Fire Officer instructing that “Pete will not take statements from crew” improperly restricted the evidence‑gathering process. As a result, although several firefighters were present at the scene, none were interviewed, no signed witness statements were taken, and follow‑up questions were never explored.

Second, the failure to interview the complainant was described as “troubling,” given that he was the sole civilian witness and the source of the complaint. The investigator did not seek a full account or request the missing “before and after” video footage, which the tribunal said could have materially assisted the fairness of the process.

Third, the investigation failed to obtain relevant call recordings and still photographs derived from the video, all of which were available to management. These omissions meant the decision‑maker proceeded without potentially important contextual evidence.

Fourth, the failure to seek medical evidence after Mr Linden repeatedly explained that his PTSD and hyperarousal response affected how he reacted to sudden perceived threats.

Fifth, the delay of two months to complete the investigation was also unjustified

Sixth, allegations of dishonesty had not been put to Mr Linden before being relied on as part of the dismissal decision.

Taking these failings together, the tribunal held that the investigation fell outside the range of reasonable responses, rendering the dismissal unfair.

Mr J Linden v Norfolk Fire and Rescue Service 

Judgment: https://lnkd.in/ebiJADBv