Apple,
Thanks for updating - a lot of people are thinking of you.
So sorry this is still going on. Your colleague keeping tabs on you is utterly, utterly bizarre, and if your manager had a problem with your time keeping, it should have been raised with you long before now (by him, not your colleague).
I'm glad you are seeing a solicitor, and I also agree with whoever said about seeing the regional Unison rep as the one you have sounds useless. I wouldn't cancel your Unison subscription though.
Is there anyone who can help wade through all the material and identify inconsistencies? For example, are there internet uses when you definitely weren't there (as per your flexi sheet)? Or conversely, are any of the alleged internet uses at times when they are claiming on the one hand that you weren't there, but on the other hand that you were on the internet? IYSWIM.
If you, or anyone you know, is any good on excel, this would be fairly easy to do - set up on a sheet outlining MainlyMaynie's 4 sources of evidence:
1 - your flexi record
2 - your computer log on times
3 - your internet usage records
4 - your colleague's bizarre stalking record
Have columns for each of these sources, then meticulously record on each row the details for each day from each of the sources. If you want I will PM an example to you.
Have you been given an opportunity to address all the issues in the documentation they have sent, or have you not been asked about it?
I wouldn't be too quick to handing the fact that you may have used the internet on occasion to them on a plate. They are playing dirty, and don't make it easy for them. Remember, the burden of proof is on them, not you. If it was me, I would be focusing on discrediting the internet evidence to the point where none of it stands up. For example, raising that you don't bank with Natwest etc. (I wonder who, in your office, does bank with them? Your payroll section should have that information, if someone's salary is paid in to Natwest - perhaps you should ask the investigator to check that. It may also be worth bringing statements from your bank to prove that you bank elsewhere.) I would also be referring to the evidence that the computers they say you use aren't even your computers.
The 'evidence' from the cleaner is hearsay.
What about your other colleague? Has she provided any evidence? Has she been asked by them?
I asked up thread - out of interest, this colleague making the allegations - was she one of the ones who was texting you & sending flowers? If so, that sort of duplicitous behaviour should be highlighted to the investigator.
Have you checked with your household insurance to see if they cover legal fees? (Check before you see the solicitor, because some of them will say that you need to consult with the insurance company from the outset, otherwise they won't cover it).
I would ask for copies of your grievance and bully & harassment policies. Your solicitor would advise, but I think you need to seriously consider submitting a grievance covering the following:
Your manager has never raised an issue of your timekeeping with you before.
It appears that your manager has been asking your colleague to keep tabs on you.
The investigation has been unfair, as you have not had an opportunity to answer the 'evidence' presented to you.
Your colleague asking cleaners to check your time-keeping is harassment.
Your colleague has made unfounded and malicious allegations against you, encouraged, it seems, by your manager.
The investigation is relying on hearsay evidence of the cleaners.
From the 'evidence' presented thus far, it is clear that your log-in details have been compromised (evidenced by use of web-sites you haven't visited, and use of terminals you don't use), yet the LA has failed to take any steps to investigate.
I'm sure there is more, but I can't think at the moment.
I went through an awful time at work last year (and MNers were brilliant in giving me support), but even with that I can't even start to think what you are going through. I'm sure the last thing you have is the energy for a fight, but you simply can't let them away with this. I don't want to come over as a bossy boots, but these are the glaring issues that come to mind.
One final, but extremely important thing. The hearing can continue in your absence if you are off sick. You MUST make sure you, your union rep or your solicitor (solicitor is probably the best bet) agrees with the employer a new date for the hearing. Don't assume that because you are signed off that the hearing will automatically be postponed.