Publications

12 October 2020 | Complaint Reviews

Report - Police Scotland PIRC/00050/20

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.

Summary

The complaint in this case arose following an investigation into the theft of the applicant’s son’s car.

The Complaint

We have reviewed the handling of a single complaint, namely that Police Scotland carried out an insufficient investigation into an allegation of theft of a car.

Police Scotland’s Decision

Police Scotland did not uphold the complaint.

Our Findings

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

There is no further action required of Police Scotland in connection with this complaint.

Police Bodies : Police Scotland

05 October 2020 | Complaint Reviews

Report - Police Scotland PIRC/00540/19 & PIRC/00192/20

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.

The Complaints

The complaints in this case arose after the applicant’s daughter was arrested and held in custody overnight.

The applicant made six complaints about Police Scotland, namely that:

1. an officer facilitated the unlawful arrest and detention of the applicant’s daughter;
2. the applicant’s daughter was held in custody to appear at court unnecessarily;
3. an officer failed to provide the applicant’s daughter with details of who made the decision to keep her in custody;
4. an officer failed to pass a message to the applicant from her daughter about caring for their horses;
5. officers failed to provide the applicant’s daughter with her glasses, contact lenses and lens solution while in custody; and
6. the applicant’s daughter contracted scabies from a blanket used while in custody.

Police Scotland’s Decision

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

Our Findings

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

Consequently, we have made a recommendation and identified a learning point to address the shortcomings that we have identified.

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 October 2020 | Complaint Reviews

Report - Police Scotland PIRC/00468/19

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.

The Complaints

The complaints in this case arose after the applicant was informed by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA) Tribunals that her review had been unsuccessful.

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

1. An officer from Police Scotland did not obtain witness statements from all potential witnesses when investigating a crime/offence reported by the applicant; and
2. The same officer did not provide all relevant information held by Police Scotland to a CICA tribunal, in particular a witness statement from the applicant’s ex-partner.

Police Scotland’s Decision

Police Scotland upheld complaint 2 but did not uphold complaint 1.

Our Findings

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

No further action is required in this matter.

Police Bodies : Police Scotland

05 October 2020 | Complaint Reviews

Report - Police Scotland PIRC/00441

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.

The Complaints

The complaints in this case arose after the applicant reported a hate crime to Police Scotland.

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

1. the hate crime that the applicant reported to Police Scotland was labelled as a ‘minor crime’ by an officer;
2. the length of time taken by an officer to investigate the incident was unsatisfactory; and
3. an officer did not contact the applicant’s GP for any medical notes after the applicant was requested to sign medical disclosure forms.

Police Scotland’s Decision

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

Our Findings

We have found that Police Scotland handled none of the applicant’s complaints to a reasonable standard.

We have made three recommendations and highlighted a learning point to address the shortcomings that we have identified with Police Scotland’s handling of the complaints.

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

Police Bodies : Police Scotland

05 October 2020 | Complaint Reviews

Report - Police Scotland PIRC/00425/19

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.

The Complaints

The complaints in this case arose from the applicant being given an antisocial behaviour warning notice by police officers in relation to his driving.

We have reviewed the handling of eight complaints, namely:

1. that an officer ignored an instruction to stay away from the applicant’s family in order to hand-deliver an item of correspondence to the applicant’s address;
2. that an officer drove his police vehicle too closely to the applicant’s vehicle;
3. that an officer was uncivil towards the applicant when speaking through the window of the police vehicle;
4. that two officers acted in a discriminatory manner by inferring that reports of excessive noise coming from vehicles in the area were caused by the alleged manner of the applicant’s driving;
5. that an officer stepped out of the police vehicle which caused the applicant delay, and the officer did not give an explanation in this respect;
6. that that an officer did not examine or inspect the applicant’s vehicle, or enquire what may have caused the alleged noise coming from the applicant’s vehicle;
7. that an officer was disinterested in discussing his intentions with the applicant, which was rude and disrespectful; and
8. that an officer told the applicant that he would post an antisocial behaviour warning notice to the applicant’s address, but instead delivered it in person.

Police Scotland’s Decision

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

Our Findings

We have found that Police Scotland handled all except complaints 6 and 8 to a reasonable standard. However, we have not recommended any further action in respect of those complaints.

Police Bodies : Police Scotland

05 October 2020 | Complaint Reviews

Report - Police Scotland PIRC/00134/19

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.

The Complaints

The complaints in this case arose after the applicant requested assistance from the police in relation to an ongoing neighbour dispute.

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

1. Between September 2018 and May 2019, Police Scotland failed to deal with an ongoing neighbour dispute; and
2. Between March and May 2019, an officer failed to provide any assistance or take any action against the applicant’s neighbour.

Police Scotland’s Decision

Police Scotland provided a single determination not to uphold complaints 1 and 2.

Our Findings

We have found that Police Scotland has handled both complaints to a reasonable standard.

A learning point has been identified for Police Scotland. We have also made an observation in the report.

Police Scotland should implement our learning point within two months of the date of this report.

Police Bodies : Police Scotland

02 October 2020 | Complaint Reviews

Report - Police Scotland PIRC/00525/19

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.

The Complaints

The complaints in this case arose after the applicant was arrested and held in police custody overnight.

The applicant made 15 complaints about Police Scotland, namely that:

1. the applicant was told that he would be interviewed at 3.30pm but instead was not interviewed until 9pm;
2. the applicant was not afforded privacy when using the bathroom while in custody;
3. an officer attempted to open the applicant’s property bag without his permission;
4. the mattress in the applicant’s cell was not appropriate for use by a person with a disability;
5. the light was left on in the applicant’s cell overnight, which meant that he was unable to sleep;
6. an officer threatened to remove the applicant’s wheelchair from him after he had fallen out of it while in his cell;
7. the applicant was offered food that was not fit for consumption while in custody;
8. the applicant’s fingerprints were taken at 4am, which he considered an unreasonable time;
9. the applicant was not given appropriate medication while in custody;
10. the applicant was offered food which was unsuitable for someone with diabetes while in custody;
11. the applicant was not offered a blanket for several hours while in custody;
12. the applicant was not taken to court until after 3.30pm;
13. the applicant was not taken to a custody suite with appropriate facilities for individuals with disabilities;
14. the applicant was not offered food between 5.30am and being taken to court at 3.30pm; and
15. an officer told the applicant that his mobile phone would be returned to him following interview but instead his phone was seized by officers.

Police Scotland’s Decision

Police Scotland upheld complaints 2, 4, 5, 6, 11, 12 & 13 but did not uphold complaints 1, 3, 7, 8, 9, 10, 14 & 15.

Our Findings

We have found that Police Scotland handled 10 of the applicant’s complaints to a reasonable standard (1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 12, 13, 14 & 15) but not so the other 5 (2, 3, 8, 10 & 11). We have made 4 recommendations and identified a learning point to address the shortcomings that we have identified.

Police Bodies : Police Scotland

02 October 2020 | Complaint Reviews

Report - Police Scotland PIRC/00524/19

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.

The Complaints

The complaints in this case arose after the police attended an incident involving the applicant’s neighbours and his subsequent interactions with the police thereafter.

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

1. officers did not ask the applicant for CCTV footage;
2. On 8 December 2019, a sergeant was abrupt and unacceptable in the manner in which he spoke to the applicant;
3. An inspector’s attitude towards the applicant was rude and unacceptable as the applicant would not drop the complaint against four of his officers;
4. A Sergeant and an Inspector refused to deal with a threat allegation that the applicant was wanting to report to the police; and
5. The applicant is dissatisfied that his neighbours have not been charged regarding his allegation against them.

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 2, 4 and 5 to a reasonable standard, but not so complaints 1 and 3.

We have made a single recommendation to address an administrative shortcoming in the manner in which Police Scotland has recorded the complaints.

Police Scotland should implement our recommendation within two months of the date of this report.

Police Bodies : Police Scotland

02 October 2020 | Complaint Reviews

Report - Police Scotland PIRC/00319/18

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.

The Complaints

We have reviewed the handling of six complaints, namely:

1. that officers incorrectly categorised a report of criminal damage to the applicant’s property as a civil matter;
2. that officers incorrectly categorised a report of thefts from the applicant’s property as a civil matter;
3. that an inspector failed to direct proper enquiry into the applicant’s report of damage and thefts;
4. that officers undertook insufficient enquiry in connection with the applicant’s report of the theft of DVDs from his property;
5. that officers failed to undertake sufficient enquiry in connection with the theft of various items from his property after his previous complaint was upheld; and
6. that insufficient updates were provided to the applicant in respect of the investigation into the thefts.

Police Scotland’s Decision

Police Scotland upheld two of the applicant’s complaints but not so the others.

Our Findings

We have found that Police Scotland handled all the applicant’s complaints to a reasonable standard. We have however made a recommendation in respect of the recording of Complaints 1 and 2. Our recommendation should be implemented by Police Scotland within two months of the date of this report.

Police Bodies : Police Scotland

02 October 2020 | Complaint Reviews

Report - Police Scotland PIRC/00307/19

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.

The Complaints

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

1. officers entered and searched the applicant’s home with no lawful authority to do so; and

2. officers refused to let the applicant view the search warrant.

Police Scotland’s Decision

Police Scotland did not uphold complaint 1 and did not record or respond to complaint 2.

Our Findings

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

We have made two recommendations for the police. In summary, we have recommended that Police Scotland update the Complaints About the Police record to reflect the corrective advice which was provided. Police Scotland should also record complaint 2 as a complaint about the police, investigate it and issue the applicant with a response.

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

Police Bodies : Police Scotland