User Bar First

This is a debugging block

An act of parliament that provides the core framework of police powers to combat crime and provide codes of practice for the exercise of these powers.
Leads and manages the development of the police service in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.
The body that represents the interests of all police constables, sergeants, and inspectors.
Deals with someone’s inability or failure to perform to a satisfactory level, but without breaching the Standards of Professional Behaviour.
Focuses on putting an issue right and preventing it from happening again by encouraging those involved to reflect on their actions and learn. It is not a disciplinary process or a disciplinary outcome.
Department within a police force that deals with complaints and conduct matters.
Refers to lower-level misconduct or performance-related issues, which are dealt with in a proportionate and constructive manner.
This means doing what is appropriate in the circumstances, taking into account the facts and the context in which the complaint has been raised, within the framework of legislation and guidance.
The average is calculated using the individual results of the forces in that most similar force group.
An investigation carried out by IOPC staff.
Carried out by the police under their own direction and control. The IOPC sets the terms of reference and receives the investigation report when it is complete. Complainants have a right of appeal following a supervised investigation (unless it is an investigation into a direction and control matter).
This act sets out how the police complaints system operates.
How a police force is run, for example policing standards or policing policy.
An investigation carried out by the police under the direction and control of the IOPC.
The organisation that is responsible for assessing how to deal with a complaint. For example – whether it can be handled locally or reaches the criteria for referral to the IOPC. The appropriate authority may be the chief officer of the police force or the PCC for the force. If a complaint investigation finds that someone has a case to answer for misconduct, the appropriate authority is responsible for arranging any misconduct proceedings. If you make a complaint, the appropriate authority for your case will contact you.
An intelligence-led agency with law enforcement powers, it is also responsible for reducing the harm that is caused to people and communities by serious organised crime.
Policing bodies include police and crime commissioners, the Common Council for the City of London, or the Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime.
Investigations carried out entirely by the police. Complainants have a right of appeal following a local investigation (unless it is an investigation into a direction and control matter).
IOPC guidance to the police service and police authorities on the handling of complaints.
A complaint or recordable conduct matter that doesn’t need to be referred to the IOPC, but where the seriousness or circumstances justifies referral.
Parameters within which an investigation is conducted.
A person is adversely affected if he or she suffers any form of loss or damage, distress or inconvenience, if he or she is put in danger or is otherwise unduly put at risk of being adversely affected.
This is where a manager deals with the way someone has behaved. It can include: showing the police officer or member of staff how their behaviour fell short of expectations set out in the Standards of Professional Behaviour; identifying expectations for future conduct; or addressing any underlying causes of misconduct.
This could be the Police and Crime Commissioner, the Common Council for the City of London, or the Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime.
A flexible process for dealing with complaints that can be adapted to the needs of the complainant. It may involve, for example, providing information and an explanation, an apology, or a meeting between the complainant and the officer involved.
A flexible process for dealing with complaints that can be adapted to the needs of the complainant. It may involve, for example, providing information and an explanation, an apology, or a meeting between the complainant and the officer involved.
A breach of standards of professional behaviour by police officers or staff so serious it could justify their dismissal.
A matter where no complaint has been received, but where there is an indication that a person serving with the police may have committed a criminal offence or behaved in a manner that would justify disciplinary proceedings.
Disapplication means that a police force may handle a complaint in whatever way it thinks fit, including not dealing with it under complaints legislation. This may only happen in certain circumstances where the complaint fits one or more of the grounds for disapplication set out in law.
The ending of an ongoing investigation into a complaint, conduct matter or DSI matter. An investigation may only be discontinued if it meets one or more of the grounds for discontinuance set out in law.
Quarter 1 covers 1 April - 30 June Quarter 2 covers 1 April - 30 September Quarter 3 covers 1 April - 31 December Quarter 4 covers the full financial year (1 April - 31 March).
You can request a review/appeal if you’re not satisfied with how your complaint has been handled.
Used to house anyone who has been detained.
Complainants have the right to appeal to the IOPC if a police force did not record their complaint or notify the correct police force if it was made originally to the wrong force.
The purpose of an investigation is to establish the facts behind a complaint, conduct matter, or DSI matter and reach conclusions. An investigator looks into matters and produces a report that sets out and analyses the evidence. There are three types of investigations: local, directed and independent.
The ending of an ongoing investigation into a complaint, conduct matter or DSI matter. An investigation may only be discontinued if it meets one or more of the grounds for discontinuance set out in law.
The type of behaviour being complained about. A single complaint case can have one or many allegations attached.
A person who makes a complaint about the conduct of someone serving with the police.
The ending of an ongoing investigation into a complaint, conduct matter or DSI matter. An investigation may only be discontinued if it meets one or more of the grounds for discontinuance set out in law.
List of officers and staff who have been dismissed from policing, or would have been if they had not retired or resigned.
The type of behaviour being complained about. A single complaint case can have one or many allegations attached.
Disapplication means that a police force may handle a complaint in whatever way it thinks fit, including not dealing with it under complaints legislation. This may only happen in certain circumstances where the complaint fits one or more of the grounds for disapplication set out in law.
An independent judicial officer, the coroner enquires into deaths reported to him/her.
A breach of the Standards of Professional Behaviour that would justify at least a written warning.
No further action may be taken with regard to a complaint if the complainant decides to retract their allegation(s).
A record is made of a complaint, giving it formal status as a complaint under the Police Reform Act 2002.
This is a format where information is written in plain English and short sentences.
The IOPC must be notified about specific types of complaint or incidents to be able to decide how they should be dealt with.
No further action may be taken with regard to a complaint if the complainant decides to retract their allegation(s).
Casework involves assessing appeals. Casework staff also have a role in overseeing the police complaints system to help ensure police forces handle complaints in the best possible way.
Disapplication means that a police force may handle a complaint in whatever way it thinks fit, including not dealing with it under complaints legislation. This may only happen in certain circumstances where the complaint fits one or more of the grounds for disapplication set out in law.
Conduct includes acts, omissions, statements and decisions (whether actual, alleged or inferred). For example: language used and the manner or tone of communications.
You can request a review/appeal if you’re not satisfied with how your complaint has been handled.
You can request a review/appeal if you’re not satisfied with how your complaint has been handled.

Easy read

An act of parliament that provides the core framework of police powers to combat crime and provide codes of practice for the exercise of these powers.
Leads and manages the development of the police service in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.
The body that represents the interests of all police constables, sergeants, and inspectors.
Deals with someone’s inability or failure to perform to a satisfactory level, but without breaching the Standards of Professional Behaviour.
Focuses on putting an issue right and preventing it from happening again by encouraging those involved to reflect on their actions and learn. It is not a disciplinary process or a disciplinary outcome.
Department within a police force that deals with complaints and conduct matters.
Refers to lower-level misconduct or performance-related issues, which are dealt with in a proportionate and constructive manner.
This means doing what is appropriate in the circumstances, taking into account the facts and the context in which the complaint has been raised, within the framework of legislation and guidance.
The average is calculated using the individual results of the forces in that most similar force group.
An investigation carried out by IOPC staff.
Carried out by the police under their own direction and control. The IOPC sets the terms of reference and receives the investigation report when it is complete. Complainants have a right of appeal following a supervised investigation (unless it is an investigation into a direction and control matter).
This act sets out how the police complaints system operates.
How a police force is run, for example policing standards or policing policy.
An investigation carried out by the police under the direction and control of the IOPC.
The organisation that is responsible for assessing how to deal with a complaint. For example – whether it can be handled locally or reaches the criteria for referral to the IOPC. The appropriate authority may be the chief officer of the police force or the PCC for the force. If a complaint investigation finds that someone has a case to answer for misconduct, the appropriate authority is responsible for arranging any misconduct proceedings. If you make a complaint, the appropriate authority for your case will contact you.
An intelligence-led agency with law enforcement powers, it is also responsible for reducing the harm that is caused to people and communities by serious organised crime.
Policing bodies include police and crime commissioners, the Common Council for the City of London, or the Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime.
Investigations carried out entirely by the police. Complainants have a right of appeal following a local investigation (unless it is an investigation into a direction and control matter).
IOPC guidance to the police service and police authorities on the handling of complaints.
A complaint or recordable conduct matter that doesn’t need to be referred to the IOPC, but where the seriousness or circumstances justifies referral.
Parameters within which an investigation is conducted.
A person is adversely affected if he or she suffers any form of loss or damage, distress or inconvenience, if he or she is put in danger or is otherwise unduly put at risk of being adversely affected.
This is where a manager deals with the way someone has behaved. It can include: showing the police officer or member of staff how their behaviour fell short of expectations set out in the Standards of Professional Behaviour; identifying expectations for future conduct; or addressing any underlying causes of misconduct.
This could be the Police and Crime Commissioner, the Common Council for the City of London, or the Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime.
A flexible process for dealing with complaints that can be adapted to the needs of the complainant. It may involve, for example, providing information and an explanation, an apology, or a meeting between the complainant and the officer involved.
A flexible process for dealing with complaints that can be adapted to the needs of the complainant. It may involve, for example, providing information and an explanation, an apology, or a meeting between the complainant and the officer involved.
A breach of standards of professional behaviour by police officers or staff so serious it could justify their dismissal.
A matter where no complaint has been received, but where there is an indication that a person serving with the police may have committed a criminal offence or behaved in a manner that would justify disciplinary proceedings.
Disapplication means that a police force may handle a complaint in whatever way it thinks fit, including not dealing with it under complaints legislation. This may only happen in certain circumstances where the complaint fits one or more of the grounds for disapplication set out in law.
The ending of an ongoing investigation into a complaint, conduct matter or DSI matter. An investigation may only be discontinued if it meets one or more of the grounds for discontinuance set out in law.
Quarter 1 covers 1 April - 30 June Quarter 2 covers 1 April - 30 September Quarter 3 covers 1 April - 31 December Quarter 4 covers the full financial year (1 April - 31 March).
You can request a review/appeal if you’re not satisfied with how your complaint has been handled.
Used to house anyone who has been detained.
Complainants have the right to appeal to the IOPC if a police force did not record their complaint or notify the correct police force if it was made originally to the wrong force.
The purpose of an investigation is to establish the facts behind a complaint, conduct matter, or DSI matter and reach conclusions. An investigator looks into matters and produces a report that sets out and analyses the evidence. There are three types of investigations: local, directed and independent.
The ending of an ongoing investigation into a complaint, conduct matter or DSI matter. An investigation may only be discontinued if it meets one or more of the grounds for discontinuance set out in law.
The type of behaviour being complained about. A single complaint case can have one or many allegations attached.
A person who makes a complaint about the conduct of someone serving with the police.
The ending of an ongoing investigation into a complaint, conduct matter or DSI matter. An investigation may only be discontinued if it meets one or more of the grounds for discontinuance set out in law.
List of officers and staff who have been dismissed from policing, or would have been if they had not retired or resigned.
The type of behaviour being complained about. A single complaint case can have one or many allegations attached.
Disapplication means that a police force may handle a complaint in whatever way it thinks fit, including not dealing with it under complaints legislation. This may only happen in certain circumstances where the complaint fits one or more of the grounds for disapplication set out in law.
An independent judicial officer, the coroner enquires into deaths reported to him/her.
A breach of the Standards of Professional Behaviour that would justify at least a written warning.
No further action may be taken with regard to a complaint if the complainant decides to retract their allegation(s).
A record is made of a complaint, giving it formal status as a complaint under the Police Reform Act 2002.
This is a format where information is written in plain English and short sentences.
The IOPC must be notified about specific types of complaint or incidents to be able to decide how they should be dealt with.
No further action may be taken with regard to a complaint if the complainant decides to retract their allegation(s).
Casework involves assessing appeals. Casework staff also have a role in overseeing the police complaints system to help ensure police forces handle complaints in the best possible way.
Disapplication means that a police force may handle a complaint in whatever way it thinks fit, including not dealing with it under complaints legislation. This may only happen in certain circumstances where the complaint fits one or more of the grounds for disapplication set out in law.
Conduct includes acts, omissions, statements and decisions (whether actual, alleged or inferred). For example: language used and the manner or tone of communications.
You can request a review/appeal if you’re not satisfied with how your complaint has been handled.
You can request a review/appeal if you’re not satisfied with how your complaint has been handled.

User Bar Second

This is a debugging block

Swyddfa Annibynnol Ymddygiad yr Heddlu

Branding

This is a debugging block

An act of parliament that provides the core framework of police powers to combat crime and provide codes of practice for the exercise of these powers.
Leads and manages the development of the police service in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.
The body that represents the interests of all police constables, sergeants, and inspectors.
Deals with someone’s inability or failure to perform to a satisfactory level, but without breaching the Standards of Professional Behaviour.
Focuses on putting an issue right and preventing it from happening again by encouraging those involved to reflect on their actions and learn. It is not a disciplinary process or a disciplinary outcome.
Department within a police force that deals with complaints and conduct matters.
Refers to lower-level misconduct or performance-related issues, which are dealt with in a proportionate and constructive manner.
This means doing what is appropriate in the circumstances, taking into account the facts and the context in which the complaint has been raised, within the framework of legislation and guidance.
The average is calculated using the individual results of the forces in that most similar force group.
An investigation carried out by IOPC staff.
Carried out by the police under their own direction and control. The IOPC sets the terms of reference and receives the investigation report when it is complete. Complainants have a right of appeal following a supervised investigation (unless it is an investigation into a direction and control matter).
This act sets out how the police complaints system operates.
How a police force is run, for example policing standards or policing policy.
An investigation carried out by the police under the direction and control of the IOPC.
The organisation that is responsible for assessing how to deal with a complaint. For example – whether it can be handled locally or reaches the criteria for referral to the IOPC. The appropriate authority may be the chief officer of the police force or the PCC for the force. If a complaint investigation finds that someone has a case to answer for misconduct, the appropriate authority is responsible for arranging any misconduct proceedings. If you make a complaint, the appropriate authority for your case will contact you.
An intelligence-led agency with law enforcement powers, it is also responsible for reducing the harm that is caused to people and communities by serious organised crime.
Policing bodies include police and crime commissioners, the Common Council for the City of London, or the Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime.
Investigations carried out entirely by the police. Complainants have a right of appeal following a local investigation (unless it is an investigation into a direction and control matter).
IOPC guidance to the police service and police authorities on the handling of complaints.
A complaint or recordable conduct matter that doesn’t need to be referred to the IOPC, but where the seriousness or circumstances justifies referral.
Parameters within which an investigation is conducted.
A person is adversely affected if he or she suffers any form of loss or damage, distress or inconvenience, if he or she is put in danger or is otherwise unduly put at risk of being adversely affected.
This is where a manager deals with the way someone has behaved. It can include: showing the police officer or member of staff how their behaviour fell short of expectations set out in the Standards of Professional Behaviour; identifying expectations for future conduct; or addressing any underlying causes of misconduct.
This could be the Police and Crime Commissioner, the Common Council for the City of London, or the Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime.
A flexible process for dealing with complaints that can be adapted to the needs of the complainant. It may involve, for example, providing information and an explanation, an apology, or a meeting between the complainant and the officer involved.
A flexible process for dealing with complaints that can be adapted to the needs of the complainant. It may involve, for example, providing information and an explanation, an apology, or a meeting between the complainant and the officer involved.
A breach of standards of professional behaviour by police officers or staff so serious it could justify their dismissal.
A matter where no complaint has been received, but where there is an indication that a person serving with the police may have committed a criminal offence or behaved in a manner that would justify disciplinary proceedings.
Disapplication means that a police force may handle a complaint in whatever way it thinks fit, including not dealing with it under complaints legislation. This may only happen in certain circumstances where the complaint fits one or more of the grounds for disapplication set out in law.
The ending of an ongoing investigation into a complaint, conduct matter or DSI matter. An investigation may only be discontinued if it meets one or more of the grounds for discontinuance set out in law.
Quarter 1 covers 1 April - 30 June Quarter 2 covers 1 April - 30 September Quarter 3 covers 1 April - 31 December Quarter 4 covers the full financial year (1 April - 31 March).
You can request a review/appeal if you’re not satisfied with how your complaint has been handled.
Used to house anyone who has been detained.
Complainants have the right to appeal to the IOPC if a police force did not record their complaint or notify the correct police force if it was made originally to the wrong force.
The purpose of an investigation is to establish the facts behind a complaint, conduct matter, or DSI matter and reach conclusions. An investigator looks into matters and produces a report that sets out and analyses the evidence. There are three types of investigations: local, directed and independent.
The ending of an ongoing investigation into a complaint, conduct matter or DSI matter. An investigation may only be discontinued if it meets one or more of the grounds for discontinuance set out in law.
The type of behaviour being complained about. A single complaint case can have one or many allegations attached.
A person who makes a complaint about the conduct of someone serving with the police.
The ending of an ongoing investigation into a complaint, conduct matter or DSI matter. An investigation may only be discontinued if it meets one or more of the grounds for discontinuance set out in law.
List of officers and staff who have been dismissed from policing, or would have been if they had not retired or resigned.
The type of behaviour being complained about. A single complaint case can have one or many allegations attached.
Disapplication means that a police force may handle a complaint in whatever way it thinks fit, including not dealing with it under complaints legislation. This may only happen in certain circumstances where the complaint fits one or more of the grounds for disapplication set out in law.
An independent judicial officer, the coroner enquires into deaths reported to him/her.
A breach of the Standards of Professional Behaviour that would justify at least a written warning.
No further action may be taken with regard to a complaint if the complainant decides to retract their allegation(s).
A record is made of a complaint, giving it formal status as a complaint under the Police Reform Act 2002.
This is a format where information is written in plain English and short sentences.
The IOPC must be notified about specific types of complaint or incidents to be able to decide how they should be dealt with.
No further action may be taken with regard to a complaint if the complainant decides to retract their allegation(s).
Casework involves assessing appeals. Casework staff also have a role in overseeing the police complaints system to help ensure police forces handle complaints in the best possible way.
Disapplication means that a police force may handle a complaint in whatever way it thinks fit, including not dealing with it under complaints legislation. This may only happen in certain circumstances where the complaint fits one or more of the grounds for disapplication set out in law.
Conduct includes acts, omissions, statements and decisions (whether actual, alleged or inferred). For example: language used and the manner or tone of communications.
You can request a review/appeal if you’re not satisfied with how your complaint has been handled.
You can request a review/appeal if you’re not satisfied with how your complaint has been handled.

Header First

This is a debugging block

Header Second

This is a debugging block

Preface First

This is a debugging block

Preface Second

This is a debugging block

Preface Third

This is a debugging block

Content

This is a debugging block

National recommendations - National Police Chiefs' Council, August 2017

On 10 June 2010 a man was detained in Wells, Somerset, by Avon and Somerset Constabulary under Section 136 of the Mental Health Act following a number of calls to the police about his behaviour. He was seen jumping in and out of traffic on a fast-moving and busy road.

Police arrived at the incident and detained the man. Officers struggled to restrain him and members of the public assisted in detaining him. The man was taken to the custody unit at Yeovil Police station and placed in a cell.

Officers became concerned for the man’s welfare and called an ambulance. Ambulance staff arrived and conducted CPR for some 20 minutes before taking him to Yeovil District Hospital, where he was declared dead.

An initial IPCC investigation was launched and an inquest into the death took place in April 2013. The inquest jury determined the cause of death was “cardiorespiratory arrest in a man intoxicated by synthetic cathinones with an accute [sic] disturbance following restraint and struggle against restraint”.

Following the inquest, legal representatives for the man’s family wrote to the IPCC to set out the terms of a complaint against Avon and Somerset Constabulary resulting from the inquest. The detail of the complaint comprised several areas of concern regarding how the man was treated by police on 10 June 2010 and the evidence given by police officers during the course of the inquest.

The IPCC investigation that followed examined the circumstances of the police interaction with the man on 10 June 2010 and whether police officers at any stage colluded to give false accounts and/or lied during their evidence to the inquest concerning what happened.

The IPCC has made the following national recommendations to the National Police Chief's Council (NPCC) and the College of Policing:

An act of parliament that provides the core framework of police powers to combat crime and provide codes of practice for the exercise of these powers.
Leads and manages the development of the police service in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.
The body that represents the interests of all police constables, sergeants, and inspectors.
Deals with someone’s inability or failure to perform to a satisfactory level, but without breaching the Standards of Professional Behaviour.
Focuses on putting an issue right and preventing it from happening again by encouraging those involved to reflect on their actions and learn. It is not a disciplinary process or a disciplinary outcome.
Department within a police force that deals with complaints and conduct matters.
Refers to lower-level misconduct or performance-related issues, which are dealt with in a proportionate and constructive manner.
This means doing what is appropriate in the circumstances, taking into account the facts and the context in which the complaint has been raised, within the framework of legislation and guidance.
The average is calculated using the individual results of the forces in that most similar force group.
An investigation carried out by IOPC staff.
Carried out by the police under their own direction and control. The IOPC sets the terms of reference and receives the investigation report when it is complete. Complainants have a right of appeal following a supervised investigation (unless it is an investigation into a direction and control matter).
This act sets out how the police complaints system operates.
How a police force is run, for example policing standards or policing policy.
An investigation carried out by the police under the direction and control of the IOPC.
The organisation that is responsible for assessing how to deal with a complaint. For example – whether it can be handled locally or reaches the criteria for referral to the IOPC. The appropriate authority may be the chief officer of the police force or the PCC for the force. If a complaint investigation finds that someone has a case to answer for misconduct, the appropriate authority is responsible for arranging any misconduct proceedings. If you make a complaint, the appropriate authority for your case will contact you.
An intelligence-led agency with law enforcement powers, it is also responsible for reducing the harm that is caused to people and communities by serious organised crime.
Policing bodies include police and crime commissioners, the Common Council for the City of London, or the Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime.
Investigations carried out entirely by the police. Complainants have a right of appeal following a local investigation (unless it is an investigation into a direction and control matter).
IOPC guidance to the police service and police authorities on the handling of complaints.
A complaint or recordable conduct matter that doesn’t need to be referred to the IOPC, but where the seriousness or circumstances justifies referral.
Parameters within which an investigation is conducted.
A person is adversely affected if he or she suffers any form of loss or damage, distress or inconvenience, if he or she is put in danger or is otherwise unduly put at risk of being adversely affected.
This is where a manager deals with the way someone has behaved. It can include: showing the police officer or member of staff how their behaviour fell short of expectations set out in the Standards of Professional Behaviour; identifying expectations for future conduct; or addressing any underlying causes of misconduct.
This could be the Police and Crime Commissioner, the Common Council for the City of London, or the Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime.
A flexible process for dealing with complaints that can be adapted to the needs of the complainant. It may involve, for example, providing information and an explanation, an apology, or a meeting between the complainant and the officer involved.
A flexible process for dealing with complaints that can be adapted to the needs of the complainant. It may involve, for example, providing information and an explanation, an apology, or a meeting between the complainant and the officer involved.
A breach of standards of professional behaviour by police officers or staff so serious it could justify their dismissal.
A matter where no complaint has been received, but where there is an indication that a person serving with the police may have committed a criminal offence or behaved in a manner that would justify disciplinary proceedings.
Disapplication means that a police force may handle a complaint in whatever way it thinks fit, including not dealing with it under complaints legislation. This may only happen in certain circumstances where the complaint fits one or more of the grounds for disapplication set out in law.
The ending of an ongoing investigation into a complaint, conduct matter or DSI matter. An investigation may only be discontinued if it meets one or more of the grounds for discontinuance set out in law.
Quarter 1 covers 1 April - 30 June Quarter 2 covers 1 April - 30 September Quarter 3 covers 1 April - 31 December Quarter 4 covers the full financial year (1 April - 31 March).
You can request a review/appeal if you’re not satisfied with how your complaint has been handled.
Used to house anyone who has been detained.
Complainants have the right to appeal to the IOPC if a police force did not record their complaint or notify the correct police force if it was made originally to the wrong force.
The purpose of an investigation is to establish the facts behind a complaint, conduct matter, or DSI matter and reach conclusions. An investigator looks into matters and produces a report that sets out and analyses the evidence. There are three types of investigations: local, directed and independent.
The ending of an ongoing investigation into a complaint, conduct matter or DSI matter. An investigation may only be discontinued if it meets one or more of the grounds for discontinuance set out in law.
The type of behaviour being complained about. A single complaint case can have one or many allegations attached.
A person who makes a complaint about the conduct of someone serving with the police.
The ending of an ongoing investigation into a complaint, conduct matter or DSI matter. An investigation may only be discontinued if it meets one or more of the grounds for discontinuance set out in law.
List of officers and staff who have been dismissed from policing, or would have been if they had not retired or resigned.
The type of behaviour being complained about. A single complaint case can have one or many allegations attached.
Disapplication means that a police force may handle a complaint in whatever way it thinks fit, including not dealing with it under complaints legislation. This may only happen in certain circumstances where the complaint fits one or more of the grounds for disapplication set out in law.
An independent judicial officer, the coroner enquires into deaths reported to him/her.
A breach of the Standards of Professional Behaviour that would justify at least a written warning.
No further action may be taken with regard to a complaint if the complainant decides to retract their allegation(s).
A record is made of a complaint, giving it formal status as a complaint under the Police Reform Act 2002.
This is a format where information is written in plain English and short sentences.
The IOPC must be notified about specific types of complaint or incidents to be able to decide how they should be dealt with.
No further action may be taken with regard to a complaint if the complainant decides to retract their allegation(s).
Casework involves assessing appeals. Casework staff also have a role in overseeing the police complaints system to help ensure police forces handle complaints in the best possible way.
Disapplication means that a police force may handle a complaint in whatever way it thinks fit, including not dealing with it under complaints legislation. This may only happen in certain circumstances where the complaint fits one or more of the grounds for disapplication set out in law.
Conduct includes acts, omissions, statements and decisions (whether actual, alleged or inferred). For example: language used and the manner or tone of communications.
You can request a review/appeal if you’re not satisfied with how your complaint has been handled.
You can request a review/appeal if you’re not satisfied with how your complaint has been handled.
IOPC reference
2013/009603
Date of recommendation
Thursday, 31 August, 2017
Date the force response is due
Thursday, 26 October, 2017
Recommendations

​Police officers responding to an incident involving someone with mental health problems should prioritise the welfare and safety of all those involved, including the patient.

Do you accept the recommendation?: 

Yes

Accepted action: 
I am writing to you regarding the recommendations made in the report [text redacted] relating to the tragic death of [text redacted]. It is entirely appropriate that every organisation seeks to understand what could be done differently and how we may prevent further deaths from occurring in police custody or following police contact. As the report highlights, there has been significant development in the police approach to mental health related demands since 2010. However, it is vital that the police take every opportunity to reflect and learn lessons. We welcome the IPCCs decision to publish a different kind of report to assist in that process and promote a public debate.

Upon publication of the report, Chief Constable Mark Collins, as the NPCC lead for mental health, accepted the five recommendations and the basis on which they were made. CC Collins has committed the police service to work towards delivery and this letter should set out how this will be done, highlighting the importance of partner actions alongside policing.

Rather than address each of the recommendations in turn, we would prefer to set out our strategy for how we hope to see policing incorporate these recommendations in to day to day business which is where the strategic challenge lies.
 
In October 2016, the College published their Authorised Professional Practice (APP) on mental health and a suite of modular, supplementary training products. This was a key national requirement from the Crisis Care Concordat (2014 in England; 2015 in Wales) and each force is now working through delivery of training against these guidelines. This work will continue into 2018. The APP stresses the need for approaches which are de-escalatory; preferring containment to restraint, and encouraging the better sharing of real-time data in order to inform decisions made in partnership with NHS colleagues where this is necessary and achievable.
 
Other work continues to ensure these approaches are embedded in day to day policing. For example, the College’s work to brigade organisations under the chairmanship of Lord Carlisle QC, which is referenced in [text redacted], seeks to look at issues of restraint in all kinds of mental health contact. Part 1 of this work was published in January 2017 (police responses to mental health and learning disability settings) and the development of Part 2 is already underway.
 
Finally, the College is undertaking work on ‘Safer Resolution’ – looking afresh at use of force incidents of all kinds, with a view to reducing the use of restraint and, where restraint is necessary, improving quality in terms of safety.
 
We recognise the challenges of partnership working that are inherent in [text redacted]. It is concerning to note many organisations have not yet completed their 2014 actions under the Crisis Care Concordat and that local action plans remain undelivered in many areas. The report emphasised the need for effective joint protocols, citing the review by Inspector Michael Brown of the s136 protocol which was in operation on the day [text redacted] tragically died in police custody. In researching this response the NPCC has carried out some dip samples in other forces that have experienced similar police encounters.
 
The research revealed that s136 and other MHA protocols, would struggle to demonstrate full compliance with the Code of Practice (CoP) to the Mental Health Act 1983 (MHA) and the associated medical guidelines which should influence how professionals come together to ensure the safety of vulnerable people in crisis (referenced in Lord Carlisle Memorandum of Understanding, Part 1).
 
Partnership working with NHS organisations has given rise to new initiatives such as street triage and liaison and diversion, all of which offer the potential to improve pathways and outcomes and which are almost universally received positively. They offer real time information sharing solutions and potentially quicker access to mental health professionals however; they are not yet fully understood and evaluated.
 
As the IPCC acknowledges, this is complicated work, especially at a time when all public services are seeking to do more with less, in a climate where demand appears to be rising. Work is due to commence this month on a review of the MHA commissioned by the Prime Minister and led by Professor Sir Simon Wessely. The NPCC has been invited to join the advisory board and will be highlighting these matters in consideration of how the MHA is framed in the future. Our aim will be to encourage further, if not facilitate, the oversight of the effective partnership arrangements which are necessary to ensure early intervention for vulnerable people and prevent such tragedies in future.
 
The NPCC and the College will draw together a summary of implications from the [text redacted] report and share these across the service, including with other NPCC portfolios such as custody and self-defence and restraint. The work will be led by the National Mental Health Forum, chaired by CC Collins as the NPCC lead.
 
We hope this response reassures the IPCC and more importantly, [text redacted]’s family, that we welcome the report, accept and understand the recommendations and commit to pushing for the necessary changes in operational policing.

​Police officers responding to an incident involving someone with mental health problems should prioritise the welfare and safety of all those involved, including the patient.

Do you accept the recommendation?: 

Yes

Accepted action: 
I am writing to you regarding the recommendations made in the report [text redacted] relating to the tragic death of [text redacted]. It is entirely appropriate that every organisation seeks to understand what could be done differently and how we may prevent further deaths from occurring in police custody or following police contact. As the report highlights, there has been significant development in the police approach to mental health related demands since 2010. However, it is vital that the police take every opportunity to reflect and learn lessons. We welcome the IPCCs decision to publish a different kind of report to assist in that process and promote a public debate.

Upon publication of the report, Chief Constable Mark Collins, as the NPCC lead for mental health, accepted the five recommendations and the basis on which they were made. CC Collins has committed the police service to work towards delivery and this letter should set out how this will be done, highlighting the importance of partner actions alongside policing.

Rather than address each of the recommendations in turn, we would prefer to set out our strategy for how we hope to see policing incorporate these recommendations in to day to day business which is where the strategic challenge lies.
 
In October 2016, the College published their Authorised Professional Practice (APP) on mental health and a suite of modular, supplementary training products. This was a key national requirement from the Crisis Care Concordat (2014 in England; 2015 in Wales) and each force is now working through delivery of training against these guidelines. This work will continue into 2018. The APP stresses the need for approaches which are de-escalatory; preferring containment to restraint, and encouraging the better sharing of real-time data in order to inform decisions made in partnership with NHS colleagues where this is necessary and achievable.
 
Other work continues to ensure these approaches are embedded in day to day policing. For example, the College’s work to brigade organisations under the chairmanship of Lord Carlisle QC, which is referenced in [text redacted], seeks to look at issues of restraint in all kinds of mental health contact. Part 1 of this work was published in January 2017 (police responses to mental health and learning disability settings) and the development of Part 2 is already underway.
 
Finally, the College is undertaking work on ‘Safer Resolution’ – looking afresh at use of force incidents of all kinds, with a view to reducing the use of restraint and, where restraint is necessary, improving quality in terms of safety.
 
We recognise the challenges of partnership working that are inherent in [text redacted]. It is concerning to note many organisations have not yet completed their 2014 actions under the Crisis Care Concordat and that local action plans remain undelivered in many areas. The report emphasised the need for effective joint protocols, citing the review by Inspector Michael Brown of the s136 protocol which was in operation on the day [text redacted] tragically died in police custody. In researching this response the NPCC has carried out some dip samples in other forces that have experienced similar police encounters.
 
The research revealed that s136 and other MHA protocols, would struggle to demonstrate full compliance with the Code of Practice (CoP) to the Mental Health Act 1983 (MHA) and the associated medical guidelines which should influence how professionals come together to ensure the safety of vulnerable people in crisis (referenced in Lord Carlisle Memorandum of Understanding, Part 1).
 
Partnership working with NHS organisations has given rise to new initiatives such as street triage and liaison and diversion, all of which offer the potential to improve pathways and outcomes and which are almost universally received positively. They offer real time information sharing solutions and potentially quicker access to mental health professionals however; they are not yet fully understood and evaluated.
 
As the IPCC acknowledges, this is complicated work, especially at a time when all public services are seeking to do more with less, in a climate where demand appears to be rising. Work is due to commence this month on a review of the MHA commissioned by the Prime Minister and led by Professor Sir Simon Wessely. The NPCC has been invited to join the advisory board and will be highlighting these matters in consideration of how the MHA is framed in the future. Our aim will be to encourage further, if not facilitate, the oversight of the effective partnership arrangements which are necessary to ensure early intervention for vulnerable people and prevent such tragedies in future.
 
The NPCC and the College will draw together a summary of implications from the [text redacted] report and share these across the service, including with other NPCC portfolios such as custody and self-defence and restraint. The work will be led by the National Mental Health Forum, chaired by CC Collins as the NPCC lead.
 
We hope this response reassures the IPCC and more importantly, [text redacted]’s family, that we welcome the report, accept and understand the recommendations and commit to pushing for the necessary changes in operational policing.

Officers should be trained to use containment rather than restraint when dealing with anyone who has, or appears to have, mental health problems.

Do you accept the recommendation?: 

Yes

Accepted action: 
I am writing to you regarding the recommendations made in the report [text redacted] relating to the tragic death of [text redacted]. It is entirely appropriate that every organisation seeks to understand what could be done differently and how we may prevent further deaths from occurring in police custody or following police contact. As the report highlights, there has been significant development in the police approach to mental health related demands since 2010. However, it is vital that the police take every opportunity to reflect and learn lessons. We welcome the IPCCs decision to publish a different kind of report to assist in that process and promote a public debate.

Upon publication of the report, Chief Constable Mark Collins, as the NPCC lead for mental health, accepted the five recommendations and the basis on which they were made. CC Collins has committed the police service to work towards delivery and this letter should set out how this will be done, highlighting the importance of partner actions alongside policing.

Rather than address each of the recommendations in turn, we would prefer to set out our strategy for how we hope to see policing incorporate these recommendations in to day to day business which is where the strategic challenge lies.
 
In October 2016, the College published their Authorised Professional Practice (APP) on mental health and a suite of modular, supplementary training products. This was a key national requirement from the Crisis Care Concordat (2014 in England; 2015 in Wales) and each force is now working through delivery of training against these guidelines. This work will continue into 2018. The APP stresses the need for approaches which are de-escalatory; preferring containment to restraint, and encouraging the better sharing of real-time data in order to inform decisions made in partnership with NHS colleagues where this is necessary and achievable.
 
Other work continues to ensure these approaches are embedded in day to day policing. For example, the College’s work to brigade organisations under the chairmanship of Lord Carlisle QC, which is referenced in [text redacted], seeks to look at issues of restraint in all kinds of mental health contact. Part 1 of this work was published in January 2017 (police responses to mental health and learning disability settings) and the development of Part 2 is already underway.
 
Finally, the College is undertaking work on ‘Safer Resolution’ – looking afresh at use of force incidents of all kinds, with a view to reducing the use of restraint and, where restraint is necessary, improving quality in terms of safety.
 
We recognise the challenges of partnership working that are inherent in [text redacted]. It is concerning to note many organisations have not yet completed their 2014 actions under the Crisis Care Concordat and that local action plans remain undelivered in many areas. The report emphasised the need for effective joint protocols, citing the review by Inspector Michael Brown of the s136 protocol which was in operation on the day [text redacted] tragically died in police custody. In researching this response the NPCC has carried out some dip samples in other forces that have experienced similar police encounters.
 
The research revealed that s136 and other MHA protocols, would struggle to demonstrate full compliance with the Code of Practice (CoP) to the Mental Health Act 1983 (MHA) and the associated medical guidelines which should influence how professionals come together to ensure the safety of vulnerable people in crisis (referenced in Lord Carlisle Memorandum of Understanding, Part 1).
 
Partnership working with NHS organisations has given rise to new initiatives such as street triage and liaison and diversion, all of which offer the potential to improve pathways and outcomes and which are almost universally received positively. They offer real time information sharing solutions and potentially quicker access to mental health professionals however; they are not yet fully understood and evaluated.
 
As the IPCC acknowledges, this is complicated work, especially at a time when all public services are seeking to do more with less, in a climate where demand appears to be rising. Work is due to commence this month on a review of the MHA commissioned by the Prime Minister and led by Professor Sir Simon Wessely. The NPCC has been invited to join the advisory board and will be highlighting these matters in consideration of how the MHA is framed in the future. Our aim will be to encourage further, if not facilitate, the oversight of the effective partnership arrangements which are necessary to ensure early intervention for vulnerable people and prevent such tragedies in future.
 
The NPCC and the College will draw together a summary of implications from the [text redacted] report and share these across the service, including with other NPCC portfolios such as custody and self-defence and restraint. The work will be led by the National Mental Health Forum, chaired by CC Collins as the NPCC lead.
 
We hope this response reassures the IPCC and more importantly, [text redacted]’s family, that we welcome the report, accept and understand the recommendations and commit to pushing for the necessary changes in operational policing.

Each local force should ensure that it has in place robust, effective and relevant local protocols that support police officers in the discharge of their duties, backed by effective working relationships with other agencies, on how to respond to incidents involving someone with mental health problems.

Do you accept the recommendation?: 

Yes

Accepted action: 
I am writing to you regarding the recommendations made in the report [text redacted] relating to the tragic death of [text redacted]. It is entirely appropriate that every organisation seeks to understand what could be done differently and how we may prevent further deaths from occurring in police custody or following police contact. As the report highlights, there has been significant development in the police approach to mental health related demands since 2010. However, it is vital that the police take every opportunity to reflect and learn lessons. We welcome the IPCCs decision to publish a different kind of report to assist in that process and promote a public debate.

Upon publication of the report, Chief Constable Mark Collins, as the NPCC lead for mental health, accepted the five recommendations and the basis on which they were made. CC Collins has committed the police service to work towards delivery and this letter should set out how this will be done, highlighting the importance of partner actions alongside policing.

Rather than address each of the recommendations in turn, we would prefer to set out our strategy for how we hope to see policing incorporate these recommendations in to day to day business which is where the strategic challenge lies.
 
In October 2016, the College published their Authorised Professional Practice (APP) on mental health and a suite of modular, supplementary training products. This was a key national requirement from the Crisis Care Concordat (2014 in England; 2015 in Wales) and each force is now working through delivery of training against these guidelines. This work will continue into 2018. The APP stresses the need for approaches which are de-escalatory; preferring containment to restraint, and encouraging the better sharing of real-time data in order to inform decisions made in partnership with NHS colleagues where this is necessary and achievable.
 
Other work continues to ensure these approaches are embedded in day to day policing. For example, the College’s work to brigade organisations under the chairmanship of Lord Carlisle QC, which is referenced in [text redacted], seeks to look at issues of restraint in all kinds of mental health contact. Part 1 of this work was published in January 2017 (police responses to mental health and learning disability settings) and the development of Part 2 is already underway.
 
Finally, the College is undertaking work on ‘Safer Resolution’ – looking afresh at use of force incidents of all kinds, with a view to reducing the use of restraint and, where restraint is necessary, improving quality in terms of safety.
 
We recognise the challenges of partnership working that are inherent in [text redacted]. It is concerning to note many organisations have not yet completed their 2014 actions under the Crisis Care Concordat and that local action plans remain undelivered in many areas. The report emphasised the need for effective joint protocols, citing the review by Inspector Michael Brown of the s136 protocol which was in operation on the day [text redacted] tragically died in police custody. In researching this response the NPCC has carried out some dip samples in other forces that have experienced similar police encounters.
 
The research revealed that s136 and other MHA protocols, would struggle to demonstrate full compliance with the Code of Practice (CoP) to the Mental Health Act 1983 (MHA) and the associated medical guidelines which should influence how professionals come together to ensure the safety of vulnerable people in crisis (referenced in Lord Carlisle Memorandum of Understanding, Part 1).
 
Partnership working with NHS organisations has given rise to new initiatives such as street triage and liaison and diversion, all of which offer the potential to improve pathways and outcomes and which are almost universally received positively. They offer real time information sharing solutions and potentially quicker access to mental health professionals however; they are not yet fully understood and evaluated.
 
As the IPCC acknowledges, this is complicated work, especially at a time when all public services are seeking to do more with less, in a climate where demand appears to be rising. Work is due to commence this month on a review of the MHA commissioned by the Prime Minister and led by Professor Sir Simon Wessely. The NPCC has been invited to join the advisory board and will be highlighting these matters in consideration of how the MHA is framed in the future. Our aim will be to encourage further, if not facilitate, the oversight of the effective partnership arrangements which are necessary to ensure early intervention for vulnerable people and prevent such tragedies in future.
 
The NPCC and the College will draw together a summary of implications from the [text redacted] report and share these across the service, including with other NPCC portfolios such as custody and self-defence and restraint. The work will be led by the National Mental Health Forum, chaired by CC Collins as the NPCC lead.
 
We hope this response reassures the IPCC and more importantly, [text redacted]’s family, that we welcome the report, accept and understand the recommendations and commit to pushing for the necessary changes in operational policing.

Forces should develop clear processes for the recording and sharing of information about individuals who are known to, or are suspected to, have mental health problems.

Do you accept the recommendation?: 

Yes

Accepted action: 
I am writing to you regarding the recommendations made in the report [text redacted] relating to the tragic death of [text redacted]. It is entirely appropriate that every organisation seeks to understand what could be done differently and how we may prevent further deaths from occurring in police custody or following police contact. As the report highlights, there has been significant development in the police approach to mental health related demands since 2010. However, it is vital that the police take every opportunity to reflect and learn lessons. We welcome the IPCCs decision to publish a different kind of report to assist in that process and promote a public debate.

Upon publication of the report, Chief Constable Mark Collins, as the NPCC lead for mental health, accepted the five recommendations and the basis on which they were made. CC Collins has committed the police service to work towards delivery and this letter should set out how this will be done, highlighting the importance of partner actions alongside policing.

Rather than address each of the recommendations in turn, we would prefer to set out our strategy for how we hope to see policing incorporate these recommendations in to day to day business which is where the strategic challenge lies.
 
In October 2016, the College published their Authorised Professional Practice (APP) on mental health and a suite of modular, supplementary training products. This was a key national requirement from the Crisis Care Concordat (2014 in England; 2015 in Wales) and each force is now working through delivery of training against these guidelines. This work will continue into 2018. The APP stresses the need for approaches which are de-escalatory; preferring containment to restraint, and encouraging the better sharing of real-time data in order to inform decisions made in partnership with NHS colleagues where this is necessary and achievable.
 
Other work continues to ensure these approaches are embedded in day to day policing. For example, the College’s work to brigade organisations under the chairmanship of Lord Carlisle QC, which is referenced in [text redacted], seeks to look at issues of restraint in all kinds of mental health contact. Part 1 of this work was published in January 2017 (police responses to mental health and learning disability settings) and the development of Part 2 is already underway.
 
Finally, the College is undertaking work on ‘Safer Resolution’ – looking afresh at use of force incidents of all kinds, with a view to reducing the use of restraint and, where restraint is necessary, improving quality in terms of safety.
 
We recognise the challenges of partnership working that are inherent in [text redacted]. It is concerning to note many organisations have not yet completed their 2014 actions under the Crisis Care Concordat and that local action plans remain undelivered in many areas. The report emphasised the need for effective joint protocols, citing the review by Inspector Michael Brown of the s136 protocol which was in operation on the day [text redacted] tragically died in police custody. In researching this response the NPCC has carried out some dip samples in other forces that have experienced similar police encounters.
 
The research revealed that s136 and other MHA protocols, would struggle to demonstrate full compliance with the Code of Practice (CoP) to the Mental Health Act 1983 (MHA) and the associated medical guidelines which should influence how professionals come together to ensure the safety of vulnerable people in crisis (referenced in Lord Carlisle Memorandum of Understanding, Part 1).
 
Partnership working with NHS organisations has given rise to new initiatives such as street triage and liaison and diversion, all of which offer the potential to improve pathways and outcomes and which are almost universally received positively. They offer real time information sharing solutions and potentially quicker access to mental health professionals however; they are not yet fully understood and evaluated.
 
As the IPCC acknowledges, this is complicated work, especially at a time when all public services are seeking to do more with less, in a climate where demand appears to be rising. Work is due to commence this month on a review of the MHA commissioned by the Prime Minister and led by Professor Sir Simon Wessely. The NPCC has been invited to join the advisory board and will be highlighting these matters in consideration of how the MHA is framed in the future. Our aim will be to encourage further, if not facilitate, the oversight of the effective partnership arrangements which are necessary to ensure early intervention for vulnerable people and prevent such tragedies in future.
 
The NPCC and the College will draw together a summary of implications from the [text redacted] report and share these across the service, including with other NPCC portfolios such as custody and self-defence and restraint. The work will be led by the National Mental Health Forum, chaired by CC Collins as the NPCC lead.
 
We hope this response reassures the IPCC and more importantly, [text redacted]’s family, that we welcome the report, accept and understand the recommendations and commit to pushing for the necessary changes in operational policing.
 

Postscript First

This is a debugging block

Postscript Second

This is a debugging block

Postscript Third

This is a debugging block

Postscript Fourth

This is a debugging block