Parking warden with dyslexia unfairly dismissed over GPS data: tribunal finds discrimination
A civil enforcement officer with severe dyslexia was unfairly dismissed after GPS data appeared to contradict his patrol records. The tribunal found procedural failings and indirect disability discrimination, awarding £17,126.
1 min read · Last updated 19 May 2026
Case details
- #dyslexia
- #disability-discrimination
- #gps-evidence
- #ghost-logging
- #acas-code-uplift
- #polkey-reduction
- #injury-to-feelings
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a Civil Enforcement Officer from 2 November 2007 until dismissal on 26 June 2019.
- The claimant has severe dyslexia, accepted as a disability by the respondent.
- On 19 April 2019, the claimant's handheld device GPS showed him in the coach park during a period he claimed to be patrolling Alma Road and Ward Royal.
- The respondent dismissed the claimant for gross misconduct, alleging deliberate falsification of records.
- The tribunal found the dismissal procedurally unfair due to inadequate disclosure of evidence and lack of clarity in allegations.
- The tribunal found the respondent indirectly discriminated against the claimant by requiring him to sign investigation notes at the end of meetings and not allowing a companion of his choice.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant began employment as a Civil Enforcement Officer with Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead.
-
TUPE transfer
Claimant's employment transferred to NSL Limited under TUPE.
-
Incident date
Claimant worked a busy Good Friday shift; his handheld device recorded GPS data that later became the basis of misconduct allegations.
-
Lunch break discussion
Claimant was spoken to about taking his lunch break too late.
-
First investigation meeting
Claimant was questioned about his lunch break and later suspended.
-
Second investigation meeting
Claimant was shown GPS data and questioned about his whereabouts.
-
Disciplinary hearing
Hearing chaired by Roisin Mallen; claimant raised a grievance about disability discrimination.
-
Dismissal
Claimant was dismissed without notice for gross misconduct.
-
Appeal hearing
Claimant's disciplinary appeal heard by Brian Knowles; later dismissed.
-
Liability judgment
Tribunal found unfair dismissal, indirect discrimination, failure to make reasonable adjustments, and harassment.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was unfairly dismissed for conduct (alleged falsification of records), whether the respondent discriminated against him due to his dyslexia, and whether the dismissal was wrongful.
The outcome
The tribunal found the claimant was unfairly dismissed for conduct. The dismissal was procedurally unfair because the employer did not adequately disclose GPS evidence or clarify the allegations, and the investigation was flawed.
The tribunal also found indirect disability discrimination: requiring the claimant to sign investigation notes at the end of meetings without allowing a companion of his choice placed him at a disadvantage due to his dyslexia. The respondent also failed to make reasonable adjustments and subjected him to harassment.
Compensation:
- Basic award: £7,126.75
- Compensatory award: reduced by 100% (Polkey reduction) because the claimant would likely have been dismissed anyway
- Total damages: £17,126.75 (includes injury to feelings and other awards)
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers must ensure that disciplinary allegations are clearly communicated and that all relevant evidence is disclosed to the employee before a hearing.
- When an employee has a known disability like dyslexia, requiring them to sign notes immediately after a meeting may amount to indirect discrimination unless reasonable adjustments are made.
- A Polkey reduction can wipe out the compensatory award if the tribunal finds the employee would have been dismissed anyway, even with a fair process.
- Long-serving employees (12 years) are entitled to a thorough investigation and fair procedure; cutting corners can lead to an unfair dismissal finding even if the misconduct is serious.
What this case shows in practice
A civil enforcement officer with 12 years' service was dismissed after his handheld device GPS showed him in a different location than he claimed to have been patrolling. The employer, NSL Limited, treated this as deliberate falsification of records and dismissed him for gross misconduct. But the tribunal found that the process was flawed from the start.
The officer had severe dyslexia, which the employer knew about. Yet during the investigation, he was asked to sign notes at the end of meetings without being given time to read them or have a companion of his choice present. The tribunal said this placed him at a disadvantage compared to non-disabled employees — amounting to indirect discrimination.
What the employer could have done differently
NSL could have avoided the unfair dismissal finding by being more transparent. The GPS evidence was not fully disclosed before the disciplinary hearing, and the allegations were not clearly set out. A fair process would have given the officer a proper opportunity to respond. The employer also failed to consider reasonable adjustments for his dyslexia, such as allowing a support person or providing written materials in advance.
Why the result matters
Although the tribunal found the dismissal unfair, it applied a 100% Polkey reduction, meaning the compensatory award was wiped out because the officer would likely have been dismissed anyway. However, the basic award of £7,126.75 and awards for injury to feelings and discrimination stood. This case is a reminder that even where misconduct is serious, a flawed process can still lead to a finding of unfair dismissal — and that disability discrimination claims can succeed even when the underlying conduct issue is genuine.
Similar cases
Dyslexic support worker wins constructive dismissal after unequal discipline
A part-time support worker with dyslexia was constructively dismissed after being disciplined for an argument while a colleague was not. The tribunal awarded £5,687, including a 20% ACAS uplift for failing to hold a grievance meeting.
Dismissed without a meeting or appeal: a conduct case with big reductions
A former employee of Fairview Grocers Limited was unfairly dismissed without any meeting or right of appeal, but his own conduct led to a 60% cut in compensation. He was awarded £3,752.89 in total.
Nursery worker with disability unfairly dismissed and discriminated against
A nursery worker was unfairly dismissed and subjected to disability discrimination by Monkton Under 5 Playgroup. The tribunal awarded £27,676 in compensation, including £16,200 for injury to feelings.
Whistleblower dismissed in flawed redundancy process: ACAS uplift adds 25% to compensation
A former employee was unfairly dismissed after making a protected disclosure about health and safety. The tribunal awarded over £50,000, including a 25% uplift for the employer's failure to follow the ACAS Code of Conduct.