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. 

 

Investigations

In investigations directed by the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS): Our findings and report to COPFS are confidential and will not be published.

In investigations referred by the Chief Constable or other policing bodies operating in Scotland: The Commissioner may publish the conclusions unless criminal proceedings are still being considered. 

In investigations referred by the Scottish Police Authority (SPA) regarding misconduct by a senior officer of the rank of ACC and above: The Commissioner is not authorised to publish reports.

 

Reviews

Whilst we consider it appropriate to be open and transparent about our work, some restrictions do apply. Our summarised CHR reports are anonymised to ensure those involved cannot be individually identified.

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.

  • 08 September 2023 | Complaint Reviews

    Report – Police Scotland – PIRC/00338/22

    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 was charged under Section 38 of the Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Act 2021 in relation to an incident that occurred on 6 March 2022. 

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

    1. on 18 March 2022 police officers did not adhere to protocols when seizing firearms from the applicant’s home;
    2. Police Scotland did not seize the applicant’s firearms until 18 March 2022, 12 days after an allegation of criminality was made against him;
    3. the applicant was not informed whom, within Police Scotland, requested a suitability review be conducted;
    4. a police officer spoke to the applicant in a “glib manner”;
    5. a police officer, when asked about the seizure of the applicant’s firearms, said that the police could do what they wanted;
    6. on 18 March 2022 the same police officer said that, in her opinion, someone with the applicant’s attitude was not fit to hold a firearms certificate;
    7. on 18 March 2022 the same police officer failed to show the applicant a firearms warrant;
    8. on 18 March 2022 at the applicant’s home, the same police officer failed to provide the applicant an explanation as to why the warrant had been craved;
    9. on 18 March 2022 the same officer was rude and unprofessional;
    10. on 18 March 2022 the same officer said she would “call firearms when she called them”;
    11. on 18 March 2022 the presence of 9 officers for over two and a half hours was not necessary or proportionate;
    12. on 18 March 2022 police officers stood waiting for firearms officers even though the applicant proved the firearms safe to an ex-firearms officer;
    13. a police officer obtained a warrant using misleading information;
    14. on 6 March 2022 police took hours to respond to the applicant’s wife’s report;
    15. on 6 March 2022 police officers failed to question the applicant or his wife;
    16. Police Scotland failed to provide the Procurator Fiscal with video recorded evidence;
    17. since 6 March 2022 Police Scotland have failed to conduct patrols and deal with offences being committed in two areas;
    18. on 6 March 2022 Police Scotland failed to investigate a report of poaching;
    19. on 6 march 2022 Police Scotland failed to investigate threats made against the applicant’s wife; and
    20. on 4 May 2022 a police officer misquoted legislation when writing to the applicant. 

    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 3 – 6, 8, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 18 and 20  to reasonable standard, but not so complaints 1, 2, 7, 9, 10, 14, 17 and 19.

    Consequently, we have made eight recommendations and identified two learning points to address the shortcomings in Police Scotland’s handling of the complaints.   In summary, we have recommended that Police Scotland provides the applicant with a further response to complaints 1, 2, 7, 9, 10, 14, 17 and 19. 

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

    Police Bodies : Police Scotland

  • 08 September 2023 | Complaint Reviews

    Report – Police Scotland – PIRC/00148/23

    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 complaint in this case arose after the applicant reported an alleged assault to the police. 

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

    • Officers told the applicant that they would not interview a suspect as they knew what she would say, and there would be no point. 

    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.

    Nonetheless, we have identified a learning point to address a shortcoming in Police Scotland’s handling of the complaint. In summary, we have advised Police Scotland to ensure that subject officers submit their own, independent statements to the complaint enquiry.

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

    Police Bodies :

  • 08 September 2023 | Complaint Reviews

    Report – Police Scotland – PIRC/00080/23

    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 various incidents during which the applicant interacted with the police. We have reviewed the handling of five complaints, namely that: 

    1. on 11 July 2017, an officer ordered the applicant to remove his cattle from an area which was part of common grazing land;
    2. on the same day, the applicant believed the officer’s instruction was directed by a senior officer, in an attempt to intimidate and bully the applicant;
    3. Police Scotland failed to investigate threats made against the applicant and another person on social media;
    4. On 28 November 2018, police officers seized the applicant’s firearms which were not returned until 15 months later, without an explanation or apology for this; and
    5. On 16 April 2019, an officer submitted a report to the Firearms Licensing Department and referred to the applicant as “the accused” which the applicant is dissatisfied with. 

    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, 4 and 5 to a reasonable standard but not so complaint 3. 

    We have made a single recommendation to address the shortcomings in Police Scotland’s handling of complaint 3. In summary, we recommend that Police Scotland conducts further enquiries into complaint 3. Thereafter, Police Scotland should provide the applicant with a further response which clearly explains the rationale for the conclusions reached.

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

    Police Bodies : Police Scotland

  • 01 September 2023 | Complaint Reviews

    Report – Police Scotland - PIRC/00567/22

    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 complaint in this case arose after the applicant made a report to Police Scotland about something which he believed to be fraud.  We have reviewed the handling of seven complaints, namely that: 

    1. Police Scotland failed to investigate the applicant’s report of fraud properly;
    2. not one person on the side of the criminality has been interviewed by Police Scotland;
    3. despite an officer confirming that a crime had been committed during a conversation with the applicant and his solicitor, no report was submitted to COPFS;
    4. Police Scotland should not have allocated the enquiry to a constable, as he did not have sufficient expertise;
    5. the same constable told the applicant that he would come out and take a statement from him with another officer, but failed to do so;
    6. the same constable should have contacted the applicant to obtain relevant information to be able to ask relevant third parties the correct questions, however, did not do so; and
    7. the same constable contacted relevant third party organisations without the applicant’s authority 

    Police Scotland’s Decision

    Police Scotland upheld complaints 1 and 4, but did not uphold complaints 2, 3, 5, 6 and 7.    

    Our Findings

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

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

    Specifically, we have recommended that Police Scotland carry out further necessary and proportionate enquiries in relation to complaint 2, following which it should 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

  • 01 September 2023 | Complaint Reviews

    Report – Police Scotland – PIRC/00117/23

    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 as a result of the applicant being involved in a parking dispute, which resulted in him being charged for a contravention of section 38 of the Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010. We have reviewed the handling of two complaints, namely that: 

    1. an officer failed to carry out a thorough enquiry, as he did not speak to the applicant and other witnesses to a parking incident at a named location, before concluding his enquiry; and
    2. the same officer was unwilling to listen to the applicant’s version of events following a parking dispute, due to his race, therefore discriminating against him. 

    Police Scotland’s Decision

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

    Our Findings

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

    Nevertheless, we have identified a learning point in relation to Police Scotland’s use of Frontline Resolution. 

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

    Police Bodies : Police Scotland

  • 01 September 2023 | Complaint Reviews

    Report – Police Scotland – PIRC/0111/23

    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 complaint in this case arose after a sum of money was stolen from the applicant’s mother. 

    We have reviewed the handling of complaint/s, namely that: 

    1. Insufficient enquiries were carried out by Police Scotland into a reported theft in 2016; and
    2. Insufficient enquiries were carried out by Police Scotland during a further investigation, of the same reported theft, in 2022. 

    Police Scotland’s Decision

    Police Scotland did not uphold the applicant’s complaints.    

    Our Findings

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

    We have identified a learning point for Police Scotland highlighting good practice regarding the administration of the complaint. 

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

    Police Bodies : Police Scotland

  • 01 September 2023 | Complaint Reviews

    Report – Police Scotland - PIRC/00109/23

    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: 

    • Police Scotland did not investigate the applicant’s fraud report. 

    Police Scotland’s Decision

    Police Scotland did not uphold the applicant’s complaint. 

    Our Findings

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

    There is no further action required in this connection. 

    Police Bodies : Police Scotland

  • 23 August 2023 | Complaint Reviews

    Report – Police Scotland – PIRC/00190/22

    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 Police Scotland’s investigation into allegations of domestic abuse involving the applicant and his former wife. 

    1. the applicant reported domestic abuse and coercive control by his ex-partner and, during the subsequent enquiry, officers either failed to note statements from witnesses or did not fully consider evidence from those witnesses, despite the applicant being advised by officers that statements had been noted from all witnesses and acted upon, resulting in his ex-partner not being charged. 

    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 issued a recommendation to address the shortcomings in Police Scotland’s handling of the complaint.

    Specifically, We recommend that Police Scotland undertakes further necessary proportionate enquiries, taking cognisance of the observations made in our report. Police Scotland should then revisit the complaint in light of the observations made in our report and by assessing all of the evidence available. A fresh response should thereafter be provided to the applicant detailing the outcome of this assessment and explaining why the complaint has - on balance - been upheld or not upheld. 

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

    Police Bodies : Police Scotland

  • 23 August 2023 | Complaint Reviews

    Report – Police Scotland – PIRC/00569/22

    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 complaint in this case arose after the applicant’s daughter made allegations of assault against him. We have reviewed the handling of six complaints, namely that: 

    1. the applicant believed he was wrongfully arrested, as a video recorded interview of his daughter was carried out by an inexperienced officer;
    2. neither Police Scotland nor Social Services informed the applicant that his daughter had previously attempted suicide by taking an overdose;
    3. officers did not take into account previous false allegations about the applicant made by his daughter of a similar nature;
    4. officers did not advise the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) of the previous false allegation made by the applicant’s daughter;
    5. when the applicant’s daughter confessed that she had lied to the police about the alleged assault by the applicant, Police Scotland should have dealt with the information instead of directing the applicant’s wife to COPFS; and
    6. the applicant was dissatisfied with the content of statements noted by officers from his wife and son, and queried how these could be used in evidence as the content had not been agreed. 

    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, 3 and 6 to a reasonable standard but not so complaints 1, 4 and 5.

    Consequently, we have made three recommendations and identified a learning point to address the shortcomings in Police Scotland’s handling of the complaints. In summary, we have recommended that Police Scotland make necessary and proportionate further enquiries, re-assess the available information and provide the applicant with a further response which allows him to properly understand whether his complaints have been upheld or not upheld. 

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

    Police Bodies : Police Scotland

  • 15 August 2023 | Complaint Reviews

    Report – Police Scotland – PIRC/00697/22

    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 when the applicant was arrested for an alleged assault on his stepdaughter. We have reviewed the handling of three complaints, namely that: 

    1. On 30 May 2020, at the applicant’s home address, a named officer was uncivil towards him and spoke to him in an accusatory manner;
    2. Between 30 May and 25 August 2020, a named officer provided false and misleading information to social services about the applicant and his wife in relation to events on 30 May 2020; and
    3. On 30 May 2020, at the applicant’s home address, a named officer was aggressive and confrontational towards him. 

    Police Scotland’s Decision

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

    Our Findings

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

    We have identified a learning point for Police Scotland in relation to good practice when responding to complaints that have exceeded the 56-day timeframe outlined in the PIRC statutory guidance that we issue to all policing bodies operating in Scotland.

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

    Police Bodies : Police Scotland