Complaint Handling Reviews

The Complaints

The complaint in this case arose after police responded to a concern for welfare report involving the applicant.

We have reviewed the handling of five complaints, namely that:

1. An officer was oppressive in his behaviour and threatened to arrest the applicant for failing to provide his details;

2. Officers were unprofessional towards the applicant;

3. Officers sourced the applicant’s date of birth from a third party;

4. Officers failed to provide the applicant with their shoulder numbers or surname; and

5. An officer used the word ‘evasive’ in correspondence with the applicant, which the applicant considered offensive.

Police Scotland’s Decision

Police Scotland did not uphold any of the applicant’s complaint.

Our Findings

We have found that Police Scotland handled complaints 3, 4 and 5 to reasonable standard; but not so complaints 1 and 2.

Consequently, we have issued a reconsideration direction, made a recommendation, and identified two learning points to address the shortcomings in Police Scotland’s handling of the complaint.  

In reconsidering complaint 1, Police Scotland should conduct any further enquiry as necessary before reassessing the complaint taking cognisance of our observations, and reach a well-reasoned position on whether the applicant’s complaint is now upheld or not upheld. In relation to complaint 2, we recommend that Police Scotland seek further accounts from the officers subject of the complaint and reassess the complaint taking cognisance of our observations. We have also identified two learning points to address administrative shortcomings in the complaint enquiry.

Our reconsideration direction, recommendation, and learning points should be completed and implemented by Police Scotland within two months of the date of this report.

Police Bodies : Police Scotland