Publications

30 November 2021 | Complaint Reviews

Report - Police Scotland - PIRC/00174/21

Our role is to review the way in which policing bodies handle complaints made about them. It is not to investigate the circumstances which led to the complaint or uphold allegations made. When carrying out a Complaint Handling Review (CHR) we consider a number of factors, including whether police carried out sufficient enquiries; their response was supported by the material information available and whether the police response was adequately reasoned.

See a Report Summary of the relevant CHR below. To comply with UK Government accessibility regulations we no longer publish documents in PDF form, so it’s currently not feasible for us to publish a full copy of the report.

The Complaints

The complaints in this case arose after the applicant received a response in relation to his previous complaints about the police.

We have reviewed the handling of three complaints, namely that:
1. a sergeant lied in a statement he provided in relation to the applicant’s previous complaint and said that he did not tell the applicant that police would no longer deal with the applicant if he recorded them;
2. the sergeant lied in his statement when he claimed that the applicant had accused him of treating the applicant differently because of his 'colour'; and
3. by lying in his statement and claiming that the applicant accused him of treating the applicant differently because of his ‘colour’, the sergeant had behaved in a discriminatory manner.
Police Scotland’s Decision
Police Scotland did not uphold any of the applicant’s complaints.

Our Findings
We have found that Police Scotland handled all of the applicant’s complaints to a reasonable standard. No further action is required in connection with the complaints

Police Bodies : Police Scotland

30 November 2021 | Complaint Reviews

Report - Police Scotland - PIRC/00285/19

Our role is to review the way in which policing bodies handle complaints made about them. It is not to investigate the circumstances which led to the complaint or uphold allegations made. When carrying out a Complaint Handling Review (CHR) we consider a number of factors, including whether police carried out sufficient enquiries; their response was supported by the material information available and whether the police response was adequately reasoned.

See a Report Summary of the relevant CHR below. To comply with UK Government accessibility regulations we no longer publish documents in PDF form, so it’s currently not feasible for us to publish a full copy of the report.

The Complaint

The complaint in this case arose following Police Scotland’s consistent determination that no criminality has occurred despite the applicant’s frequent reports of being targeted by various forms of technological surveillance and harassment.

We have reviewed the handling of a single complaint, namely that: 

• Police Scotland have failed to take any action to investigate various reports that the applicant made of stalking and harassment; the applicant having reported his home being targeted by radio waves and pictures being projected through his windows, on each occasion police have failed to conduct enquiry. 

Police Scotland’s Decision

Police Scotland did not uphold the applicant’s complaint. 

Our Findings

We have found that Police Scotland did not handle the applicant’s complaint to a reasonable standard.

However, the information lacking in Police Scotland’s response has been provided to the applicant in our Complaints Handling Review. No further action is required in this connection.

Police Bodies : Police Scotland

30 November 2021 | Complaint Reviews

Report - Police Scotland - PIRC/00056/21

Our role is to review the way in which policing bodies handle complaints made about them. It is not to investigate the circumstances which led to the complaint or uphold allegations made. When carrying out a Complaint Handling Review (CHR) we consider a number of factors, including whether police carried out sufficient enquiries; their response was supported by the material information available and whether the police response was adequately reasoned.

See a Report Summary of the relevant CHR below. To comply with UK Government accessibility regulations we no longer publish documents in PDF form, so it’s currently not feasible for us to publish a full copy of the report.

The Complaints

The complaints in this case arose after the applicant was arrested for assault.

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

1. The officers who arrested the applicant on 6 September 2019 dug handcuffs into his wrists using excessive force;
2. Two officers who attended at the applicant’s home were uncivil towards him, shouting and swearing “you’re going to the f****n’ station whether you like it or not”;
3. Officers refused to give the applicant his medication when he was in police custody;
4. The applicant was advised that a nurse would see him, but this never happened;
5. The applicant was advised that an ambulance would be contacted for him but this did not happen; and
6. The applicant believes that an officer involved in arresting him is friends with his daughter’s partner, and this was the reason that so many officers turned up to arrest him. 

Police Scotland’s Decision

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

Our Findings

We have found that Police Scotland handled complaints 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 to a reasonable standard; but not so complaint 4. However, despite the shortcoming identified in Police Scotland’s handling of complaint 4, there is no further action required in this connection.

Police Bodies : Police Scotland

30 November 2021 | Complaint Reviews

Report - Police Scotland - PIRC/00244/21

Our role is to review the way in which policing bodies handle complaints made about them. It is not to investigate the circumstances which led to the complaint or uphold allegations made. When carrying out a Complaint Handling Review (CHR) we consider a number of factors, including whether police carried out sufficient enquiries; their response was supported by the material information available and whether the police response was adequately reasoned.

See a Report Summary of the relevant CHR below. To comply with UK Government accessibility regulations we no longer publish documents in PDF form, so it’s currently not feasible for us to publish a full copy of the report.

The Complaint

The complaint in this case arose following Police Officers attending to a third party report of drug use at the applicant’s property .

We have reviewed the handling of a single complaint, namely that: 

• A police officer failed to follow Police Scotland procedure when they submitted a Child Concern report stating that there was a smell of Cannabis coming from within the applicant’s address leading to a check by Social 

Police Scotland’s Decision

Police Scotland did not uphold the applicant’s complaint. 

Our Findings

We have found that Police Scotland handled the applicant’s complaint to a reasonable standard.

However, we also identified a learning point to address a shortcoming in Police Scotland’s handling of the complaint. In summary, we have highlighted the importance to public confidence in Police Scotland’s complaints handling procedure of factual accuracy in the complaint response.

Our learning point should be implemented by Police Scotland within two months of the date of this report.

Police Bodies : Police Scotland

30 November 2021 | Complaint Reviews

Report - Police Scotland - PIRC/00563/20

Our role is to review the way in which policing bodies handle complaints made about them. It is not to investigate the circumstances which led to the complaint or uphold allegations made. When carrying out a Complaint Handling Review (CHR) we consider a number of factors, including whether police carried out sufficient enquiries; their response was supported by the material information available and whether the police response was adequately reasoned.

See a Report Summary of the relevant CHR below. To comply with UK Government accessibility regulations we no longer publish documents in PDF form, so it’s currently not feasible for us to publish a full copy of the report.

The Complaints

The complaints in this case arose following the death of the applicant’s mother as a result of a road traffic collision. We have reviewed the handling of eight complaints, namely that:

1. officers carried out insufficient enquiries into a serious road traffic collision;
2. the applicant’s mother’s injuries were not properly identified at the location of the collision;
3. the vehicle which collided with the applicant’s mother was removed from the location very quickly;
4. no collision investigation was carried out;
5. no family liaison officer was appointed following the collision;
6. statements were not noted from key witnesses to the collision;
7. the driver’s phone records and tracker for the vehicle were not checked; and
8. the Procurator Fiscal (PF) was not provided with the full circumstances of the collision. 

Police Scotland’s Decision

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

Our Findings

We have found that Police Scotland handled six of the applicant’s complaints to a reasonable standard (1, 3, 4, 6, 7 and 8) but not so the other two (2 and 5).

We have made 2 recommendations to address the shortcomings in Police Scotland’s handling of the complaints. We recommend that further enquiries are carried out in relation to both complaints 2 and 5, following which a further response should be sent to the applicant.

Our recommendations should be implemented by Police Scotland within two months of the date of this report.

Police Bodies : Police Scotland

30 November 2021 | Complaint Reviews

Report - Police Scotland - PIRC/00277/21

Our role is to review the way in which policing bodies handle complaints made about them. It is not to investigate the circumstances which led to the complaint or uphold allegations made. When carrying out a Complaint Handling Review (CHR) we consider a number of factors, including whether police carried out sufficient enquiries; their response was supported by the material information available and whether the police response was adequately reasoned.

See a Report Summary of the relevant CHR below. To comply with UK Government accessibility regulations we no longer publish documents in PDF form, so it’s currently not feasible for us to publish a full copy of the report.

The Complaints

The complaints in this case arose after the applicant was arrested for breaching special bail conditions. 

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

1. Officers failed to allow the applicant to search her home for correspondence, which proved the bail conditions for which she was arrested had been lifted;
2. The arresting officers told the applicant that she would be given an opportunity to speak to a sergeant to explain and investigate the circumstances surrounding the bail conditions, but this opportunity was not afforded to her;
3. An officer at the police station believed the applicant was ‘faking’ illness and made an insincere offer of medical help;
4. An arresting officer photographed the applicant’s residential permit, which caused the applicant to believe that she was racially discriminated against; and
5. Whilst being searched within the custody facility, the applicant’s upper body was naked. 

Police Scotland’s Decision

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

Our Findings

We have found that Police Scotland handled complaints 1, 2, 3 and 4 to a reasonable standard, but not so complaint 5. However, despite the shortcoming identified in Police Scotland’s handling of complaint 5, there is no further action required in this connection.

We have identified three learning points in relation to naming officers in the final response letter, securing CCTV and maintaining auditable records.

Our learning points should be completed by Police Scotland within two months of the date of this report.

Police Bodies : Police Scotland

24 November 2021 | Complaint Reviews

Report - Police Scotland - PIRC/00030/20

Our role is to review the way in which policing bodies handle complaints made about them. It is not to investigate the circumstances which led to the complaint or uphold allegations made. When carrying out a Complaint Handling Review (CHR) we consider a number of factors, including whether police carried out sufficient enquiries; their response was supported by the material information available and whether the police response was adequately reasoned.

See a Report Summary of the relevant CHR below. To comply with UK Government accessibility regulations we no longer publish documents in PDF form, so it’s currently not feasible for us to publish a full copy of the report.

The Complaints 

The complaints in this case arose from Police Scotland’s involvement with the applicant and her mother. 

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

1. Police Scotland reported the applicant and her mother to the Social Work Department in response to reports made by the applicant regarding her mother’s neighbours;
2. The action taken by Police Scotland in response to reports made by the applicant regarding her mother’s neighbours was dissatisfactory; and
3. A police officer referred the applicant and her mother to the Social Work Department against the applicant’s wishes, despite reassurances that he would not do so if the applicant allowed him to meet with her and her mother. 

Police Scotland’s Decision

Police Scotland upheld complaint 2, but did not uphold complaints 1 and 3. 

Our Findings

We have found that Police Scotland handled the applicant’s complaints to a reasonable standard.

Police Bodies : Police Scotland

05 November 2021 | Complaint Reviews

Report - Police Scotland - PIRC/00545/20

Our role is to review the way in which policing bodies handle complaints made about them. It is not to investigate the circumstances which led to the complaint or uphold allegations made. When carrying out a Complaint Handling Review (CHR) we consider a number of factors, including whether police carried out sufficient enquiries; their response was supported by the material information available and whether the police response was adequately reasoned.

See a Report Summary of the relevant CHR below. To comply with UK Government accessibility regulations we no longer publish documents in PDF form, so it’s currently not feasible for us to publish a full copy of the report.

The Complaint

The complaint in this case arose as a result of a Police officer speaking to the applicant’s daughters regarding an incident.

We have reviewed the handling of a single complaint, namely that a police officer spoke to the applicant’s daughters regarding an incident out with the joint interview process, or without the presence of an adult, and dishonestly suggested that his daughters could not provide any evidential information.

Police Scotland’s Decision

Police Scotland did not uphold the applicant’s complaint. 

Our Findings

We have found that Police Scotland handled the applicant’s complaint to a reasonable standard.

Police Bodies : Police Scotland

05 November 2021 | Complaint Reviews

Report - Police Scotland - PIRC/00307/21

Our role is to review the way in which policing bodies handle complaints made about them. It is not to investigate the circumstances which led to the complaint or uphold allegations made. When carrying out a Complaint Handling Review (CHR) we consider a number of factors, including whether police carried out sufficient enquiries; their response was supported by the material information available and whether the police response was adequately reasoned.

See a Report Summary of the relevant CHR below. To comply with UK Government accessibility regulations we no longer publish documents in PDF form, so it’s currently not feasible for us to publish a full copy of the report.

The complaints

The complaints in this case arose after the applicant reported having received a threatening message. We have reviewed the handling of two complaints, namely that: 

1. Despite having an appointment to meet with officers to report an incident, Police Scotland failed to keep that appointment and officers failed to attend to speak to the applicant; and

2. Police Scotland failed to record or take appropriate action in response to a report of threatening messages. 

Police Scotland’s Decision

Police Scotland did not uphold either of the applicant’s complaints. 

Our Findings

We have found that Police Scotland handled complaint 1 to a reasonable standard, but not so complaint 2. 

Consequently, we have made a recommendation and issued a learning point to address the shortcomings in Police Scotland’s handling of complaint 2. We have recommended that Police Scotland consider the context of the message received by the applicant and whether this would constitute a criminal offence under section 127 of the Communications Act 2003. Police Scotland should thereafter provide the applicant with a further response advising whether any further action should have been taken in respect of the message. Our learning point reminds the police that officers should be identifiable in the complaint response, and therefore should be referred to by either their name or badge number. 

Our recommendation and learning point should be implemented by Police Scotland within two months of the date of this report.

Police Bodies : Police Scotland

05 November 2021 | Complaint Reviews

Report - Police Scotland - PIRC/00203/21

Our role is to review the way in which policing bodies handle complaints made about them. It is not to investigate the circumstances which led to the complaint or uphold allegations made. When carrying out a Complaint Handling Review (CHR) we consider a number of factors, including whether police carried out sufficient enquiries; their response was supported by the material information available and whether the police response was adequately reasoned.

See a Report Summary of the relevant CHR below. To comply with UK Government accessibility regulations we no longer publish documents in PDF form, so it’s currently not feasible for us to publish a full copy of the report.

The Complaints

The complaints in this case arose from Police Scotland’s investigation into an alleged theft that the applicant reported.  

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

1. Constable A failed to properly investigate a theft which the applicant reported;
2. Constable A failed to prosecute the offenders in a timely manner;
3. Constable A made a false statement on the crime report which resulted in the incident being de-crimed;
4. Constable A omitted the supporting evidence which the applicant and his wife provided to him which showed it was a theft; and
5. Constable A withheld from the applicant and his wife that the incident had been de-crimed until he was forced to admit this. 

Police Scotland’s Decision

Police Scotland upheld complaints 2 and 5, but did not uphold complaints 1, 3 and 4. 

Our Findings

We have found that Police Scotland handled the applicant’s complaints to a reasonable standard.

Nonetheless we have made a recommendation that Police Scotland separate complaint 2 into two distinct allegations.

Our recommendation should be implemented by Police Scotland within two months of the date of this report.

Police Bodies : Police Scotland