System Incompatibility?
Dear Independent Office for Police Conduct,
You published this document:
https://policeconduct.gov.uk/sites/defau...
It clearly states
"The police have a duty to record complaints made by members of the public about the conduct of a person serving with the police and about the direction and control of a police force. The accurate and consistent recording of complaints plays a part in ensuring public confidence in the police complaints system. It also contributes to a sound evidence base to inform development of future policy and practice at local and national levels. 1.2This document provides guidance for recording complaints and definitions for a range of terms used in relation to police complaints. It applies to all complaints as defined under the Police Reform Act 2002, as amended by the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011, and has been developed in consultation with force professional standards departments. "
On page 11 onward it shows a table identifying the relevant complaint categories A-Y along with textual definitions for each category.
Northumbria Police however failed to record complaints under the relevant category even if the actual textual descriptions were cut and pasted into the allegations made.
Having made yet another complaint using this system last year I then received a response from Northumbria Police which redefined my allegations under completely different categories, and upon requesting information as to where the category definitions originated I was directed to this document
https://www.policeconduct.gov.uk/sites/d...
Which has as Appendix A starting at page 24, a totally different category system ranging from A-L which does not appear to equate to the Dec 2017 document.
This would appear to be an issue in that you have issued guidance to complainants informing them to make complaints using one set of definitions for submitting the complaints,
Whilst simultaneously issuing guidance to the Police to record complaints using a completely different definition system?
Please provide clarification as to the two documents explaining why both are still present on the site and which should be used by complainants and which by police in relation to complaints.
Please provide any information on whether the police must record the complaint made by the complainant under the categories identified by the complainant, or whether the police are allowed to change the nature of and indeed category of the complaint after the fact?
Finally in light of the "Power Of Initiative" apparently held by the head of the IOPC, please provide any information held regarding how a matter can be brought to the attention of the person with the power of initiative, regarding issues of serious corruption within a police force, when every available avenue of communication to the IOPC regarding this serious corruption is immediately dispatched by IOPC staff to the corrupt organisation in question?
Yours faithfully,
W Hunter
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 IOPC, your email and any
attachments will be assessed, logged and forwarded onto the appropriate
department to prepare the response.
FOI & DPA Team
This message and its content may contain confidential, privileged or
copyright information. They are intended solely for the use of the
intended recipient. If you received this message in error, you must not
disclose, copy, distribute or take any action which relies on the
contents. Instead, please inform the sender and then permanently delete
it. Any views or opinions expressed in this communication are solely those
of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the IOPC. Only
specified staff are authorised to make binding agreements on behalf of the
IOPC by email. The IOPC accepts no responsibility for unauthorised
agreements reached with other employees or agents. The IOPC cannot
guarantee the security of this email or any attachments. While emails are
regularly scanned, the IOPC cannot take any liability for any virus that
may be transmitted with the internet. The IOPC communication systems are
monitored to the extent permitted by law. Consequently, any email and or
attachments may be read by monitoring staff.
Dear W Hunter
Thank you for your email requesting information. This is being considered under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA). We will now consult with the relevant department to gather the response to your request.
We propose to respond to you on or before the 29 April 2021 in line with the timescales prescribed by the FOIA.
While we are aiming to complete your request within that timeframe, it is possible that our response will be delayed as a result of our current working arrangements under the COVID-19 outbreak. We will keep you updated should we be unable to respond by the due date.
If you have any questions about this request please contact us. Please remember to quote reference number 1009150 in any future correspondence about this matter.
Yours sincerely
Freedom of Information & Data Protection Team
Independent Office for Police Conduct
PO Box 473
Sale
M33 0BW
0300 020 0096
www.policeconduct.gov.uk
Follow us on Twitter at: @policeconduct
Find out how we handle your personal data.
The IOPC is proud to have achieved Customer Service Excellence accreditation
Dear W Hunter
You have framed your email below as a request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA). However we have assessed your questions as requests for clarification of published material that is available on our website rather than for recorded information. We have made an operational decision to respond reasonably and proportionally as we would to a general enquiry.
Before addressing the points you raise, we consider it necessary to explain our position regarding the FOIA. Your email below makes clear references to your own experiences with the police complaints process through complaints you have made about Northumbria Police. It is apparent that you are in disagreement with the way your own complaints have been categorised and/ or handled. We have explained to you several times previously that the FOIA is not a channel through which you can try to further correspondence about your own personal cases and circumstances or to continue communication about concluded matters, simply because you disagree with the outcome.
The police complaints legislation provides rights for complainants to challenge decisions and handling of their complaints and you should not therefore attempt to use the FOIA to try to bypass due process. You continue to frame general questions, which have clear links to your own circumstances, as FOIA requests and we consider that this is an improper use of the right of access.
Having reviewed your recent history of correspondence with the FOI and DPA team a pattern is emerging that demonstrates a persistent attempt to try to communicate regarding personal matters that have been concluded. Otherwise your requests are for information that is not reasonably likely to be held but which you seek to try to validate your own opinions or spark debate. This is not the fundamental purpose of the FOIA.
Whilst you have made it clear that you are dissatisfied with the handling of some of your personal complaint cases raised against Northumbria Police, particularly the way that they have been categorised, or whether they have been subject to mandatory referral, the IOPC’s position has been explained to you many times. As have the next steps to seek redress where you are dissatisfied with the complaint handling or wish to raise new concerns.
The majority of our responses to you are met with further additional requests , further complaints or even allegations of criminality. The pattern of your correspondence strongly indicates that there is no end in sight to your requests for information framed as formal FOIA requests. Guidance from the Information Commissioner lists a number of indicators that may suggest a request is vexatious. These include where a request suggests personal grudges, unreasonable persistence and an intransigent mindset.
We will continue to assess each of your requests for information on its own merits and will assess whether a formal FOIA response is warranted. However we would like to explain that we will be considering future correspondence which is framed as a request for information under the FOIA but has clear links to your personal circumstances, or appears to be an attempt to reopen concluded matters, as to whether it meets the threshold of a vexatious request under the FOIA. If we decide that it does then we will not be obliged to respond.
We respectfully ask that you utilise the rights of review and/ or appeal in relation to the police complaints process if you wish to seek redress about your personal cases. You should seek independent advice regarding judicial review if you wish to challenge IOPC decisions about your personal cases. Please also be mindful that we are not obliged under the FOIA to answer questions generally, to give advice or legal interpretation, or to express opinions, unless they are held in recorded form.
Turning to the matters you raise in your email below, the first document to which you refer is guidance on the recording of complaints and is clearly labelled on our website as being relevant for complaints received before 1 February 2020.
The second document is updated guidance on data capture and is clearly labelled as relating to complaints received from 1 February 2020. The legislation underpinning the police complaints process changed on 1 February 2020 and you can find out more about the changes by reading the Statutory Guidance which is available on our website: https://www.policeconduct.gov.uk/sites/d...
We consider that it is perfectly reasonable to continue to publish both documents on our website as they are both relevant within their respective timeframes. Your assumptions that one sent of guidance is issued to complainants and one simultaneously to police showing different criteria is inaccurate and baseless. The purpose and dates of the two documents are clearly explained.
Both guidance documents are intended to assist police forces with the recording of complaint allegations on their systems and this is explained within the documents. If you have a concern about the way your complaint allegations have been categorised by Northumbria Police you should raise this with the police at the time of recording or utilise your right of appeal / review regarding the handling of your complaint.
The IOPC has the Power of Initiative which allows us to treat matters that have not been recorded or referred as if they have been. Further information regarding this power is at page 64 of the Statutory Guidance. It is the Regional Directors of the IOPC, under the delegated authority of the Director General, that will utilise the Power of Initiative and they will make decisions on a case by case basis. If you wish to raise any concern, you should contact the IOPC via the general enquiries email address : https://www.policeconduct.gov.uk/who-we-...
where all correspondence is considered, assessed and referred to the most appropriate person or department for consideration as necessary.
We trust this explains our position.
Yours sincerely
The FOI and DPA Team
Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC)
PO Box 473
Sale
Manchester
M33 0BW
Tel: 0300 020 0096
www.policeconduct.gov.uk
Follow us on Twitter at: @policeconduct
Find out how we handle your personal data.
The IOPC is proud to have achieved Customer Service Excellence accreditation
We now regularly publish practical advice and guidance for handling complaints in our magazine FOCUS
We work to defend the right to FOI for everyone
Help us protect your right to hold public authorities to account. Donate and support our work.
Donate Now