In five of the Complaint Handling Reviews (CHRs), we concluded the complaints were reasonably handled by police.
A series of recommendations and a reconsideration direction were issued to Police Scotland in relation to four other CHRs.
In one other CHR, although the complaints were reasonably handled, a learning point was issued to Police Scotland.
In PIRC/00474/20, the complaints in this case arose after the applicant called police to report a speeding vehicle she had witnessed. We found that Police Scotland handled complaint 2 - that a police officer would not provide the applicant with their name - to a reasonable standard, but not so complaint 1 - that the same police officer behaved in a rude and uncivil manner towards the applicant.
As a result, we have made a recommendation to Police Scotland to reassess complaint 1 and provide the applicant with a further response. We further recommend that Police Scotland records complaint 2 separately.
In PIRC/00473/20, six complaints were made following the applicant’s interaction with police officers in May 2020 during which he was handcuffed and placed in a police car. We found that Police Scotland handled complaints 1, 3 4 & 5 to a reasonable standard but not so complaints 2 and 6.
We have given a reconsideration direction in respect of complaint 2 that officers handcuffed and searched the applicant and placed him in a police car without providing him with any explanation. A further recommendation was made in relation to complaint 6, that officers failed to adhere to Police Scotland’s code of ethics or their oath of office.
Further enquiries are to be carried out in relation to both complaints and a further response then sent to the applicant.
In PIRC/00396/20, the five complaints in this case arose after the applicant reported a disturbance to the police. We have found that Police Scotland handled complaints 2, 3, and 5 to a reasonable standard, but not so complaints 1 and 4.
In complaint 1, on 3 March 2020, officers were not interested in what the applicant had to say and did not view his CCTV footage.
In complaint 4, officers from a different police station viewed the applicant's CCTV footage of the incident from 3 March 2020 and formed a different opinion on whether a crime had been committed.
However, despite the shortcomings identified in Police Scotland’s handling of complaints 1 and 4, there is no further action required of Police Scotland.
In PIRC/00170/19, the three complaints in this case arose from the police detaining the applicant and searching his home. We found that complaints 2 and 3 were not handled reasonably by Police Scotland.
In complaint 2, officers removed a pair of denim jeans from the applicant’s property, however this removal was not recorded by police and the jeans have never been returned to him.
In complaint 3, officers removed a mobile phone from the applicant’s property, however this removal was not recorded by police and the phone has never been returned to him.
Consequently, we have made two recommendations to address the shortcomings in the handling of the complaints. In summary, we have recommended that Police Scotland undertake additional enquiry and provide the applicant with a further response.
In PIRC/00287/20, the complaints in this case arose after the applicant was arrested and then held in police custody over the weekend.
We have found that Police Scotland handled all of the applicant’s complaints to a reasonable standard. We have, however, identified a learning point relative to the administration of the complaints. Police have been advised that when dealing with future complaints and where there is a significant delay in responding to a complainer they should ensure that the final response letter provides an explanation for the delay and/or an apology if appropriate.
All actions issued to Police Scotland should be implemented within two months.
View the summarised reports HERE.