Publications

19 April 2021 | Complaint Reviews

Report - Police Scotland PIRC/00483/20

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 after the applicant made a number of phone calls to Police Scotland and was arrested.

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

1. On 9 September 2018, the applicant was arrested at his home address for no legitimate reason;
2. During the applicant’s arrest, officers needlessly applied handcuffs to him; and
3. On the same day, officers took the applicant’s mobile phone and it was never returned.

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 three of the applicant’s complaints to a reasonable standard.

There is no further action required by Police Scotland.

Police Bodies : Police Scotland

12 April 2021 | Complaint Reviews

Report - Police Scotland PIRC/00409/20

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 the attendance of police officers at the applicant’s property.

We have reviewed the handling of three complaints, namely:

1. that officers did not attend when a plumber forced entry to the applicant’s property, and the officers took no action in respect of excessive damage to his door;
2. that officers failed to take action in relation to a plumber drink-driving; and
3. that an officer provided inconsistent accounts of her actions when she attended the applicant’s property, and made up a story to cover her actions and those of another officer.

Police Scotland’s Decision

Police Scotland did not uphold the applicant’s complaints.

Our Findings

We have found that Police Scotland handled complaints 1 and 2 to a reasonable standard, but not so complaint 3. Consequently, we have made a recommendation and identified a learning point to address the shortcomings in Police Scotland’s handling of complaint 3. We recommend that Police Scotland conduct further enquiry in relation to this complaint, and assess the impact of the officers’ copied statements in light of our observations. Our learning point reminds Police Scotland of the importance of officers submitting their own accounts.

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

Police Bodies : Police Scotland

12 April 2021 | Complaint Reviews

Report - Police Scotland PIRC/00368/20

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 after the applicant was accused of sexually assaulting his daughter.

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

• In 2012, the subject officers - in conjunction with the applicant’s ex-partner - coerced the applicant’s daughter to make a false allegation of sexual assault against him.

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. There is no further action required of Police Scotland.

Police Bodies : Police Scotland

06 April 2021 | Complaint Reviews

Report - Police Scotland PIRC/00488/20

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.

Report Summary

The complaints in this case arose from the applicant’s contact with Police Scotland in relation to an ongoing neighbour dispute

The Complaints

We have reviewed the handling of a single complaint that a police officer intimidated and threatened the applicant during a telephone call.

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

06 April 2021 | Complaint Reviews

Report - Police Scotland PIRC/00293/20

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.

Report Summary

The complaints in this case arose after the applicant’s interactions with the police regarding an ongoing dispute with his neighbours.

The Complaints

We have reviewed the handling of two complaints that:

1. The applicant is dissatisfied with the police response after he reported that his neighbour had deliberately coughed on him and would not move 6 feet away from him, which the applicant said put him in fear of his life; and
2. The applicant is dissatisfied that the police are withholding information from him regarding the name of the person(s) that told a female officer that his property was shared and had passed comment on how it could be used.

Police Scotland’s Decision

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

Our Findings

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

There is no further action required by Police Scotland in this connection

Police Bodies : Police Scotland

06 April 2021 | Complaint Reviews

Report - Police Scotland PIRC/00514/20

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.

Report Summary

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

The Complaints

We have reviewed the handling of five complaints that:

1. On 25 June 2019, at [named police station], a sergeant threatened to assault the applicant;
2. On 25 June 2019, at [named police station], the applicant was forced to strip as officers told him that he had a mental illness;
3. Whilst the applicant was in custody at [named police station], officers threatened to ‘pay a visit’ to his wife unless he co-operated with them;
4. On 25 June 2019, and as a result of the search, officers caused damage to a property linked to the applicant; and
5. The applicant requested a copy of the CCTV footage from [named police station], however this has not been provided.

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

Consequently, we have made three recommendations to address the shortcomings identified in the handling of complaints 1, 3 and 4. In summary, we recommend that Police Scotland carry out further enquiry in relation to complaints 1, 3 and 4, and provide the applicant with a further response in respect of each of the complaints.

We have also issued two learning points to ensure that future response letters include the officers names or badge numbers so that they are identifiable, and also to ensure that an officer makes enquiries at the earliest possibility to seize CCTV.

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

Police Bodies : Police Scotland

06 April 2021 | Complaint Reviews

Report - Police Scotland PIRC/00486/20

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.

Report Summary

The complaints in this case arose after Constable A called the applicant to offer advice in relation to nuisance calls that the applicant was alleged to have made.

The Complaints

We have reviewed the handling of 5 complaints, namely:

1. the police constable who contacted the applicant to offer advice in regards to alleged nuisance calls would not provide him with specific details about the dates, times and content of the calls;
2. the same police constable inappropriately contacted the applicant from a mobile phone;
3. the same police constable behaved in an unprofessional manner towards the applicant;
4. a police sergeant sought to dismiss the applicant’s complaint without investigating it;
5. the police sergeant also behaved in an unprofessional manner towards 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 1, 2, 4 and 5 to a reasonable standard but not so complaint 3.

Consequently, we have made a recommendation to address the shortcomings in Police Scotland’s handling of complaint 3.

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

Police Bodies : Police Scotland

06 April 2021 | Complaint Reviews

Report - Police Scotland PIRC/00455/20 & PIRC/00456/20

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.

Report Summary

The complaints in this case arose after the applicant reported one instance of what he considered to be dangerous driving and another of careless driving to the police.

The Complaints

We have reviewed the handling of seven complaints that:

1. an officer incorrectly assessed an incident of dangerous driving which the applicant reported on 4 March 2020;
2. officers provided the applicant with insufficient updates into his report of dangerous driving of 4 March 2020;
3. the applicant’s report of dangerous driving of 4 March 2020 was compromised by being passed between various officers in different regions;
4. no Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP) was issued in relation to the applicant’s report of dangerous driving of 4 March 2020;
5. officers incorrectly assessed the applicant’s report of careless driving made between 5 and 26 May 2020, failing to issue a NIP;
6. officers failed to take ownership of the applicant’s report of careless driving made between 5 and 26 May 2020 and failed to keep him updated; and
7. officers advised the applicant that prosecution in relation to his report of careless driving made between 5 and 26 May 2020 would be problematic as there was a cycle path nearby.

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 the applicant’s complaints to a reasonable standard.

No further action is required of police Scotland in relation to the complaints considered in this review.

Police Bodies : Police Scotland

06 April 2021 | Complaint Reviews

Report - Police Scotland PIRC/00388/20

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.

Report Summary

The complaints in this case arose following the applicant being reported to the Procurator Fiscal for a breach of the peace after he took part in a protest in regards to ongoing works near his property.

The Complaints

We have reviewed the handling of four complaints that:

1. an officer charged and reported the applicant to the Procurator Fiscal based on evidence which was untrue;
2. an officer charged and reported the applicant to the Procurator Fiscal based on evidence which was not impartial;
3. an officer handcuffed the applicant despite knowing that the applicant recently had surgery; and
4. the applicant was not provided with the correct information on procedures, family contact and medical welfare in terms of pre-existing conditions.

Police Scotland’s Decision

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

Our Findings

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

Consequently we have made a recommendation in relation to complaint 1 to re-assess the available information and provide the applicant with a fresh response. We have also made a further recommendation and administrative recommendation in relation to complaint 2. We have recommended that Police Scotland provide the applicant with an apology and also record complaint 2 as a separate complaint.

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

Police Bodies : Police Scotland

06 April 2021 | Complaint Reviews

Report - Police Scotland PIRC/00251/20

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.

Report Summary

The complaints in this case arose following the applicant’s report to police in respect of youths entering school premises to play football.

The Complaints

We have reviewed the handling of three complaints:

1. that officers did not take sufficient action following the applicant’s report of youths breaking into the school and causing damage to property;
2. that officers did not take sufficient action following the applicant’s report that youths were not adhering to social distancing rules; and
3. that an officer rebutted the applicant’s assertion that the youths involved should at least have received a warning for breaking into the school, causing damage and not social distancing.

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 and 2 to a reasonable standard, but not so Complaint 3.

We have made two recommendations to address shortcomings we have identified. In summary, we have recommended that Police Scotland record Complaint 2 as a distinct complaint about the police. In relation to Complaint 3, we have recommended that the police reassess the complaint and thereafter provide the applicant with a further response.

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

Police Bodies : Police Scotland