Recording decision requirements

The request was successful.

Dear Independent Police Complaints Commission,

I have 3 questions for you please. The first is very simple.

1) Does Regulation 33 (1) and the provision of sub paragraph (2) of the The Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012 apply to a police recording decision of a complaint?

2) What is the minimum information required to oblige the police to make a recording decision.

Please list it in numbers. For example

i) The date the conduct happened
ii) The place the conduct happened
iii) the name of the complainant
iiii) The address of the complainant

3) Please list which specific pieces of information would mean that the police are not required to make a recording decision. For example, one reason may be because there is no identified conduct. Please be specific on the actual reasons why the obligations of making a recording decision under Schedule 3 PRA 2002 would not be obliged to be fulfilled

Yours faithfully,

Paul Smith

!FOI Requests,

This is an automated email please do not respond to it.

Thank you for your email.

If you have made a request for information to the IPCC, your email and any attachments will be assessed logged and forwarded onto the appropriate department to acknowledge and respond to.

FOI Team

Gemma Thomas,

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Smith

Thank you for your information request

Please find attached our response.

Yours sincerely

Gemma Thomas
Freedom of Information & Data Protection Manager (DPO)
Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC)
90 High Holborn
London WC1V 6BH
[email address]
www.ipcc.gov.uk

In early 2018, the IPCC will become the Independent Office for Police Conduct. Find out more here

Dear Gemma Thomas,o

Your response completely avoids the request in its entirety.

You also quoted the appeals section which has no relevance to the question I asked what soever.

As for question 1), again I will repeat the question as you have ignored this request - 1) Does Regulation 33 (1) and the provision of sub paragraph (2) of the Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012 apply to a police recording decision of a complaint?

(it does not have this information in the IPCC Statutory Guidance, either in paragraphs 3.17 to 3.26, 3.19 to 3.20 like you wrongly claim, or anywhere else in the guidance for that matter)

As for question 2, I asked what was the minimum information required to make a recording decision NOT information about the recording decision itself. The sections of the IPCC Statutory Guidance you quoted merely talks of the exemptions for the decisions itself. I am asking for the minMum information required to make the decision, not the clauses for the decision to not record the complaint

If a police force does NOT MAKE a recording decision (differentiated from using a an exemption to MAKE a non recording decision) because the complaint does not have enough information in it, then:

What is the minimum information required to oblige the police to MAKE a recording
decision.

Please list it in numbers. For example:
i) The date the conduct happened
ii) The place the conduct happened
iii) The name of the complainant
iiii) The address of the complainant

Yours sincerely,

Paul Smith

Dear Gemma Thomas,

I would also like to complaint that my FOI was not dealt with promptly.

This is a different legal requirement than to the 20 day rule. The 20 day rule is merely a long stop.

The reason why I am complaint as you response is so inadequate that the worthless information you have provided could have been provided much earlier as all you have simply done is provide a "link", nothing more. A link to something I never requested.

There is no reason why you had to wait until the 20 day period to send me a link.

You have no dealt with it in a promptly manner.

Yours sincerely,

Paul Smith

Gemma Thomas,

4 Attachments

Dear Mr Smith

Thank you for your email below in which you express concerns about the original response to your information request.

We have conducted an internal review on your request. Attached is our response.

Yours sincerely

Gemma Thomas
Freedom of Information & Data Protection Manager (DPO)
Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC)
90 High Holborn
London WC1V 6BH

www.ipcc.gov.uk

In early 2018, the IPCC will become the Independent Office for Police Conduct. Find out more here

show quoted sections

Dear Mr Knight,

Thank you for your reply.

I find your response to address my request very good.

I am grateful for such clarity you have given in the information I requested.

I will now close the request ass successful

Yours sincerely,

Paul Smith

Gemma Thomas,

Thank you for your email to the Independent Police Complaints Commission. I am currently out of the office until Monday 13 October.

I will be checking my emails and will contact you as soon as possible.

Kind regards,

Gemma Thomas
Freedom of Information & Data Protection Manager
Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC)
90 High Holborn
London WC1V 6BH
[email address]<mailto:[email address]>
www.ipcc.gov.uk<http://www.ipcc.gov.uk/>

Martin McGartland (Account suspended) left an annotation ()

Police watchdog (IPCC) ‘racist and corrupt’

The Met’s Olympics poster girl is suing the complaints commission, claiming it frustrates inquiries to protect accused officers

The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC), which investigates misconduct and racism, is riddled with corruption and discriminatory practices, according to a whistleblower.

Carol Howard, a former investigator at the police watchdog who was the Metropolitan police poster girl for the London 2012 Olympics, claims senior executives “believe their duty is not to investigate officers but to protect the reputation of the police force concerned and its senior officers in particular”.

She also says that some investigators at the watchdog secretly support the racist police officers whom they are investigating. As a result they try to “frustrate, delay, restrict and close down investigations” to protect the targets of their inquiries.

Howard, 37 who is suing the IPCC for racial discrimination and victimisation .... (The Times - LONDON, 18 November 2017) Read in Full, here: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/polic...

Paul Smith left an annotation ()

Dear Martin,

A colleague of mine has a portfolio of the IPCC that identifies 35 corrupt IPCC employees some of a senior management position. His portfolio is compelling

He is planning on exposing this insidious organisation for what it really is next year. I would be grateful if I could send him your email on so he can get in contact with you.

Many Thanks