We publish as much information as we can about the work that we do. 

Here, you can find various documents and records relating to our investigations, Complaint Handling Reviews, publications, audits and business documents, such as our strategic and business plans, annual reports and policies. 

If you are looking for a specific document please select from the filters below and click 'filter results'.

If you know a specific Complaint Handling Review reference number, please enter it here. Please note, it must be entered in the following format, e.g.: PIRC/00642/16.

  • 20 September 2022 | Complaint Reviews

    Report – Police Scotland – PIRC/00083/22

    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 number of allegations the applicant made to the police in the 1990s. We have reviewed the handling of one complaint, namely that: 

    • The police did not properly investigate allegations made by the applicant against her ex-husband, first reported to a local constabulary in the 1990s. 

    Police Scotland’s Decision

    Police Scotland upheld 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

  • 20 September 2022 | Complaint Reviews

    Report – Police Scotland – PIRC/00044/22

    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, who is a serving police officer, was injured on duty whilst dealing with an incident. We have reviewed the handling of two complaints, namely that: 

    1. A police officer neglected his duty by failing to record or investigate crimes of assaulting a police officer and resisting arrest; and;
    2. A police officer carried out insufficient enquiries into a crime of theft by housebreaking. 

    Police Scotland’s Decision

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

    Our Findings

    We have found that Police Scotland handled complaint 2 to a reasonable standard but no so complaint 1. Consequently, we have made recommendations to address the shortcoming in Police Scotland’s handling of complaint 1 and to reassess a procedural issue in connection with complaint 2. 

    In summary, we have recommended that Police Scotland carry out further enquiry and provide a further response in relation to complaint 1 and reassess whether any further action is now required in light of our observations in complaint 2. 

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

    Police Bodies : Police Scotland

  • 13 September 2022 | Complaint Reviews

    Report – Police Scotland – PIRC/00004/19

    Report – Police Scotland – PIRC/00004/19
    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 Complaints


    The complaints in this case arose following Police Scotland’s contact with the applicant in connection with matters involving the applicant and his former partner. We reviewed the handling of twenty eight complaints, namely that:

    1. the applicant was not provided with an outcome of a welfare check he requested in respect of his daughter on 23 December 2018;
    2. Police Scotland failed to seize CCTV evidence and present it to the court;
    3. Police Scotland failed to properly investigate claims that the applicant breached his bail conditions on 23 December 2018;
    4. Police Scotland used bail legislation to antagonise and arrest the applicant on 6 January 2019;
    5. officers who attended at the applicant’s home on 26 August 2018 were oppressive and threatened to arrest him if he did not leave;
    6. officers asked the applicant’s ex-partner to text him and attend at his home address in a bid to antagonise him, so they would have grounds to arrest him;
    7. on 26 August 2018, an officer disclosed to the applicant’s ex-partner that he had motoring convictions from 2005;
    8. an officer tried to entrap the applicant by asking his ex-partner to accompany them to his home to antagonise him and arrest him;
    9. an officer re-attended at the applicant’s home address on 1 September 2018 and tried to get his ex-partner to ‘make something up’ to get the applicant arrested;
    10. officers provided false information to the children’s reporter by stating that the applicant’s daughter was present during a domestic incident;
    11. on 30 July 2019, a call handler refused to carry out a welfare check in respect of the applicant’s daughter;
    12. on 30 July 2019, a member of staff at a police station was rude and aggressive towards the applicant and refused to provide him with details of a welfare check;
    13. in June 2019, an officer failed to carry out investigation in relation to an allegation of fraud reported by the applicant;
    14. officers told the applicant’s ex-partner what to say about his fraud allegation and told her not to worry as it “wasn’t going anywhere”;
    15. Police Scotland provided false information to the children’s reporter; in relation to the applicant attending a police station and alleged abuse of his ex-partner;
    16. On 10 October 2019, an officer used excessive force which resulted in the applicant banging his head;
    17. On 10 October 2019, the applicant was not provided with medical assistance in police custody;
    18. On 10 October 2019, the applicant was not provided with medication in police custody;
    19. officers carried out an unlawful search of the applicant’s car on 10 October 2019;
    20. officers failed to advise the applicant of the reason he was taken into custody on 10 October 2019 but an officer said he would come back and speak to him about it;
    21. officers failed to conduct an investigation into the applicant’s allegation of sexual assault against his ex-partner which he made on 15 July 2019;
    22. on 28 October 2019, an officer failed to take the applicant’s report that his ex- partner had threatened him and his family;
    23. an officer was more interested in investigating the applicant rather than his report of criminal allegations;
    24. an officer failed to seize evidence from a computer relating to the applicant’s allegation of sexual assault;
    25. on 31 October 2019, an officer informed the applicant that he had been ‘too busy’ to update him about his allegation of sexual assault;
    26. an officer knew the applicant’s ex-partner was lying about a tracking device that was found in his tracksuit pocket;
    27. on 5 December 2018, a sergeant instructed the applicant’s ex-partner to remove his daughter from the house when there was no danger to her; and,
    28. officers failed to update the applicant in relation to threatening text messages sent to his mother by his ex-partner.

    Police Scotland’s Decision
    Police Scotland upheld complaints 1, 20 and 24 and did not uphold the remaining twenty five complaints.

    Our Findings
    We have found that Police Scotland handled complaints 1 to 10, 12 to 21 and 23 to 28 to a reasonable standard but not so complaints 11 and 22.
    Consequently, we have made a single recommendation to address the shortcomings in Police Scotland’s handling of complaint 22. Specifically, we have recommended that Police Scotland undertakes additional enquiry into complaint 22 and thereafter provides the applicant with a further response. We did not make any recommendation in respect of complaint 11.
    Our recommendation should be implemented by Police Scotland within two months of the date of this report.

     

     

    Police Bodies : Police Scotland

  • 06 September 2022 | Complaint Reviews

    Report– Police Scotland – PIRC/00600/21

    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 is currently not feasible for us to publish a full copy of the report.

    The Complaints

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

    1. officers lied to the applicant about what a witness saw, to get him to say that he had been driving his vehicle on 12 June 2020;
    2. officers used undue pressure to get the applicant to admit that he had been driving his vehicle on 12 June 2020; and
    3. officers did not attempt to interview the applicant’s grandson in respect of him potentially driving the applicant’s vehicle on 12 June 2020, which was a line of enquiry. 

    Police Scotland’s Decision

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

    Our Findings

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

    We have made two recommendations to address the shortcomings in Police Scotland’s handling of complaints 2 and 3. 

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

     

    Police Bodies : Police Scotland

  • 06 September 2022 | Complaint Reviews

    Report – Police Scotland – PIRC/00587/21

    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

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

    1. The applicant was inappropriately summoned to the Police Office for interview by an officer stating he was to attend in order that the matter could be “put to bed”;
    2. An officer inappropriately summoned the applicant to the Police Office for interview by way of a telephone call to arrange his attendance;
    3. Officers failed to provide the applicant with access to a solicitor during his interview, despite him requesting one;
    4. The process of being held at the charge bar and searched was degrading;
    5. The applicant was inappropriately searched and provided information about his rights at the conclusion of the process, as opposed to at the beginning; and
    6. An officer whitewashed the applicant’s complaint and lied about him accepting that it was concluded. 

    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.

    However, we have made a recommendation in relation to an administrative shortcoming in respect of how Police Scotland recorded the applicant’s complaints. In summary, we have recommended that Police Scotland records complaints 1 and 2 separately.

     

    Police Bodies : Police Scotland

  • 06 September 2022 | Complaint Reviews

    Report – Police Scotland – PIRC/00507/21

    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 when the applicant was stopped and searched by police officers outside his home, and subsequently charged with theft. We have reviewed the handling of nine complaints, namely that: 

    1. Police officers stopped the applicant outside his home and asked for his details without justification;
    2. Police officers failed to identify themselves i.e. badge numbers, names and station they were based at, before demanding the applicant’s name;
    3. Police officers searched the applicant under ‘section 60’ without justification;
    4. The applicant asked police officers to arrest him so that he could be afforded legal representation but they refused to do so;
    5. Instead of defusing the situation when the applicant’s neighbours became involved, police officers asked them for the applicant’s name;
    6. Police officers charged the applicant but he was not detained or arrested;
    7. A witness was visited by the police but no statement was noted from her prior to a report being sent to the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service;
    8. Police officers disclosed details about the applicant to the victim, which led to comments being made about him on social media; and
    9. A police officer took two months to reply to a request from the applicant’s solicitor. 

    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 to 8 to a reasonable standard but not so complaint 9. 

    We have made a recommendation in connection with complaint 9. 

    Specifically, we have recommended that Police Scotland reassesses the complaint. Thereafter, Police Scotland should provide the applicant with a further response which outlines whether the complaint is upheld or not upheld, and clearly explains the reason for whatever outcome is reached. 

    We have also recommended that Police Scotland records complaints 6 and 7 as separate complaints.

    Police Bodies : Police Scotland

  • 06 September 2022 | Complaint Reviews

    Report – Police Scotland – PIRC/00477/21

    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

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

    • on 15 September 2020, whilst being held in police custody, the applicant was left in his cell without clothes or a blanket for 6 hours, which caused him to feel intimidated and embarrassed. 

    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. 

    We have made a single recommendation requesting that Police Scotland re-assess the complaint and provide the applicant with a further response. 

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

    Police Bodies : Police Scotland

  • 06 September 2022 | Complaint Reviews

    Report– Police Scotland – PIRC/00474/21

    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 is currently not feasible for us to publish a full copy of the report.

    The Complaints

    The complaints in this case arose as a result of officers’ attending the address of the applicant’s friend (Mr A) in connection with an argument that had broken out between them.  We have reviewed the handling of three complaints, namely that: 

    1. that Police Scotland failed to carry out sufficient investigations into the incident for which the applicant was arrested;
    2. that officers provided false statements regarding the incident that resulted in the applicant’s arrest;
    3. that an officer knocked the applicant off balance and into a wall during his arrest causing him an injury;
    4. that officers placed the applicant in a cell overnight without medical care for his head injury; and
    5. that Police Scotland attempted to hide and manipulate evidence which resulted in the applicant’s conviction. 

    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 and 3 to a reasonable standard but not so complaints 1, 4 and 5. Consequently, we have made five recommendations and identified a learning point to address the shortcomings in Police Scotland’s handling of the complaints.

     

    Police Bodies : Police Scotland

  • 06 September 2022 | Complaint Reviews

    Report – Police Scotland – PIRC/00160/21

    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 stopped and searched by officers in relation to an incident reported to Police Scotland. We have reviewed the handling of two complaints, namely that: 

    1. On 19 August 2019 two police officers did not have sufficient grounds to stop and search the applicant; and
    2. Police Scotland failed to provide the applicant with a description, in terms of race, of the suspect in relation to the incident which led to the applicant being stopped and searched by officers. 

    Police Scotland’s Decision

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

    Our Findings

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

    Police Bodies : Police Scotland

  • 06 September 2022 | Complaint Reviews

    Report – Police Scotland – PIRC/00075/22

    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 officers responded to an incident involving the applicant and he was conveyed to hospital by ambulance. 

    We have reviewed the handling of one complaint, namely that: 

    • officers made an accusation to NHS staff that the applicant was a “fire raiser”, which resulted in this information being added to his medical records. 

     

    Police Scotland’s Decision

    Police Scotland did not uphold the applicant’s complaints. 

    Our Findings

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

    We have made a recommendation to address the shortcomings in Police Scotland’s handling of the complaints.

    Specifically we recommend that Police Scotland undertake further proportionate and necessary enquiries and re-assess this complaint, taking cognisance of the observations made in our report. The applicant should thereafter be provided with a fresh response, which explains the additional enquiries undertaken, the information gathered and clearly states whether the complaint is upheld or not upheld, and the reasoning behind the determination reached. 

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

     

     

    Police Bodies : Police Scotland