Mr M Khanzadeh v Royal Mail Group Limited — 2020

The claimant was dismissed after the respondent concluded that he had stolen an envelope from a customer's letterbox while working as a post delivery person. The claimant said he had misdelivered post while under time pressure on an unfamiliar round and returned to retrieve it. The tribunal considered the respondent's disciplinary and appeal decisions, including reliance on CCTV, customer complaint material, and PDA route data.

The tribunal found that the respondent had not carried out a reasonable investigation. It identified failures to investigate gaps in the CCTV, the credibility of the customer's complaint, whether other CCTV or witnesses might support the claimant's account, whether any item was actually missing, whether Barclays correspondence had been delivered through Royal Mail, and whether the alleged item was mail within the respondent's policy. It also found that PDA data had influenced the decision even though the respondent's agreement with the union said it should not be used as a disciplinary tool.

The tribunal concluded that the respondent did not have reasonable grounds to believe the claimant was guilty of theft, dishonesty, or loss of integrity, and that dismissal was not within the band of reasonable responses. It also found that the claimant's misdelivery and failure to ensure post was fully pushed through contributed to the situation, warranting a 20% reduction to the basic and compensatory awards, with Polkey and remedy issues to be considered later.