Fillable 2015 Statutory Guidance English

Fill Online, Printable, Fillable, Blank 2015 Statutory Guidance English Form

Use Fill to complete blank online INDEPENDENT POLICE COMPLAINTS COMMISSION pdf forms for free. Once completed you can sign your fillable form or send for signing. All forms are printable and downloadable.

2015 Statutory Guidance English

On average this form takes 581 minutes to complete

The 2015 Statutory Guidance English form is 322 pages long and contains:

0 signatures
0 check-boxes
2324 other fields

Country of origin: UK
File type: PDF

Use our library of forms to quickly fill and sign your Independent Police Complaints Commission forms online.

BROWSE INDEPENDENT POLICE COMPLAINTS COMMISSION FORMS

Fill has a huge library of thousands of forms all set up to be filled in easily and signed.

Fill in your chosen form

Sign the form using our drawing tool

Send to someone else to fill in and sign.

find another form

Statutory Guidance

to the police service

on the handling of complaints

Amended May 2015

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION 4

Whom the guidance applies to 5

How the guidance is arranged 5

Overview – the three ways into

the system 5

The Police Reform and Social

Responsibility Act 2011: Changes

to the police complaints system 8

PROMOTING ACCESS 12

The importance of an

accessible system 12

Providing information and access 12

Complainants who need

additional assistance 13

Complaints made by young people

under 16 14

COMPLAINTS 16

Initial handling 16

Deﬁnition of a complaint 17

Who can complain? 18

Recording a complaint 19

Complaints about

discriminatory behaviour 22

Who can be complained about? 23

Decisions not to notify or record

a complaint 24

Deciding how to handle a complaint 24

DISAPPLICATION 25

When can disapplication be carried

out by the appropriate authority? 25

When the IPCC’s permission needs

to be obtained 26

Grounds for disapplication 27

Partial disapplication 29

Appeals against the decision

to subject the complaint

to disapplication 29

LOCAL HANDLING 30

Local resolution 31

It is not possible to locally resolve

the complaint 34

CONDUCT MATTERS 36

Deﬁnition of a conduct matter 36

Recording a conduct matter 36

Conduct matters involving

allegations of discrimination 39

Conduct matters relating to people

who no longer work for the police 39

Referral of conduct matters to

the IPCC 39

DEATH OR SERIOUS INJURY MATTERS 40

Deﬁnition of a DSI matter 40

Recording a DSI matter 41

Referral of DSI matters 41

REFERRALS 42

Complaints that must be

referred to the IPCC 42

Conduct matters that must

be referred to the IPCC 43

Referral of DSI matters 43

Mandatory referral criteria 44

Deﬁnitions of referral criteria 44

Matters which the IPCC requires

to be referred to it (‘call in’) 47

Deadlines for referral 47

Voluntary referrals 48

Referral of complaints about

direction and control 48

Notiﬁcation of referral 49

Determining whether and how

a matter should be investigated 49

INVESTIGATIONS 51

Purpose of an investigation 51

Appointment of a person to

carry out the investigation 51

Terms of reference 53

Keeping an audit trail 53

The scope of the investigation 54

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

CONTENTS

3Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Allegations involving discrimination 55

Death or serious injury matters

turning into conduct matters 57

Special requirements 57

Severity assessments 58

Notices of investigation 60

Representations to the investigator 60

Interviews 61

Power to suspend an investigation

or other procedure 62

Resumption of a complaint after

criminal proceedings 64

Suspension of ofﬁcers and

special constables 65

Providing information/communication 65

DISCONTINUANCES 68

When can an investigation be

discontinued by the appropriate

authority 68

When the IPCC’s permission

needs to be obtained 68

Requirement to obtain

representations from the

complainant 70

Grounds for discontinuance 70

Notiﬁcation 72

Action to be taken following

a discontinuance 72

Appeal against the decision

to discontinue 73

CONCLUDING THE INVESTIGATION 74

The investigation report 74

Criticism 83

Who receives the report? 84

What does the IPCC expect the

appropriate authority to do with

the report? 84

Death or serious injury

investigation outcomes 86

Publication 87

ACTION AFTER THE INVESTIGATION 88

Communication with the complainant

and interested persons after the

conclusion of the investigation 88

Apologies 90

Outcomes for individuals 90

Learning lessons 95

Inquest proceedings 99

APPEALS 100

Principles of appeal handling 100

Who considers the appeal 101

Appeals to the chief ofﬁcer 103

Appeals to the IPCC 106

Appeal validity 107

Appeals against a failure to notify

or record a complaint or to

determine whether it is the

appropriate authority (non-

recording appeals) 111

Appeals against the decision

to disapply 112

Appeals against the outcome of

the local resolution of a complaint

or the outcome of a complaint

handled otherwise than in

accordance with Schedule 3

of the PRA 2002 116

Appeals against the decision

to discontinue 119

Appeals against investigation 123

DATA COLLECTION

AND MONITORING 131

Responsibilities of the chief ofﬁcer 131

Responsibilities of the local

policing body 132

The police complaints system

performance framework 133

LEGAL DEFINITIONS 134

CONTENTS continued

CONTENTS

4Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Section 1:

INTRODUCTION

Section 1:

INTRODUCTION

1.1 The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) has a statutory duty to

secure and maintain public conﬁdence in the police complaints system in England

and Wales. This guidance has an important part to play in this. It is one of the ways

in which the IPCC assists local policing bodies and forces to comply with their legal

obligations and achieve high standards in the handling of complaints, conduct and

death and serious injury (DSI) matters.

1.2 The Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 introduced a number of

changes to the police complaints system. These changes have been incorporated

into this guidance.

1.3 This guidance also draws on good practice in complaints handling and, in

particular, the Parliamentary and Health Ombudsman’s Principles of Good

Complaints Handling

. These are:

• getting it right

• being customer focused

• being open and accountable

• acting fairly and proportionately

• putting things right

• seeking continuous improvement.

1.4 These principles apply to the handling of complaints in many different situations and

are very relevant to dealing with complaints against police ofﬁcers, special constables

and police staff members. The focus should not be solely on the process involved and

the issue of whether anyone is to blame. Instead, it should be on understanding that a

complaint is an expression of dissatisfaction with the way a person has been treated

or the service he or she has received. Such dissatisfaction needs to be taken seriously

and is an important part of feedback on performance.

1.5 The police complaints system is not straightforward or easy to understand, even for

practitioners. It can be even more difﬁcult for complainants. That is why everyone

involved in administering the system has a responsibility for ensuring that complainants

and other parties are not disadvantaged and that they can access the information they

need in a straightforward way. Accessibility is a vital part of securing public conﬁdence.

www.ombudsman.org.uk

5Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 151

Whom the guidance applies to

1.6 The guidance is issued under Section 22 of the Police Reform Act 2002. It applies to

local policing bodies and all 43 Home Ofﬁce police forces in England and Wales. Local

policing bodies, police ofﬁcers, police staff members and special constables working

within those forces must all have regard to the guidance. It also applies to those

agencies and non-Home Ofﬁce forces that have entered into Section 26 or Section

26BA agreements with the IPCC, subject to any particular provisions contained within

those agreements.

1.7 If the people listed above do not follow the guidance, they need to have a sound

rationale for departing from it or risk legal challenge. A failure to have regard to the

guidance is admissible in evidence in any disciplinary proceedings and any appeal

proceedings following a disciplinary decision.

1.8 This guidance is written with the needs of professionals within the police service and

local policing bodies in mind. It is also available to the public and other individuals and

groups who have an interest in the system. In addition, the IPCC has published a range

of other material to assist different audiences.

How the guidance is arranged

The law and IPCC guidance

1.9 The guidance follows, so far as is possible, the chronological order of events in the police

complaints system. Within the main body of the document, the law is highlighted in

boxed text to differentiate it from IPCC guidance. The text in these boxes paraphrases

or explains the law and is not a direct quotation from the legislation. A number of

ﬂowcharts provide a visual representation of some of the more complex processes.

Legal deﬁnitions

1.10 Rather than including legal deﬁnitions throughout the guidance itself, key terms

and concepts are deﬁned in section 15. As this guidance is primarily intended to be

used electronically, these deﬁnitions are accessible through links to section 15. In

the published version, the deﬁnitions can be found at the end of the document.

Dealing with allegations of discriminatory behaviour

1.11 It is a matter of real concern to society when a person serving with the police is

perceived to have acted in a discriminatory and partial way. Speciﬁc guidance on the

handling of allegations of discriminatory behaviour is included in the guidance. In

addition, the IPCC guidelines on dealing with allegations of discriminatory behaviour

are available as a separate document on the IPCC website. Local policing bodies and

persons serving with the police should have regard to that guidance when dealing

with cases involving allegations of discrimination.

Overview – the three ways into the system

1.12 There are three ways into the system – complaints (see section 3), conduct matters (see

section 6) and DSI matters (see section 7). This guidance covers the initial handling of

Section 1:

INTRODUCTION

6Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

each of these elements separately as there are different considerations and decisions to

be made. From the point of referral to the IPCC, the guidance converges, as the handling

of a referral and the investigation process is broadly the same, regardless of its origin.

Complaints

1.13 The following chart provides an overview of the various stages in handling a complaint,

the decisions that need to be made and the relevant sections of this guidance.

Section 1:

INTRODUCTION

Complaint received

Carry out local investigation

Record the complaint

Must/should the

complaint be referred?

Is the complaint

suitable for local

resolution?

Does it fall within

exemptions from

recording?

Section 3 – Complaints

Section 8 – Referrals

Section 5 – Local handling

Section 9 – Investigations

Do not record the

complaint, notify

complainant of

any appeal right to

the IPCC

Refer the complaint

to IPCC

Yes

Carry out local

resolution

7Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 151

Conduct matters

1.14 This chart provides an overview of the various stages in dealing with a conduct matter,

the decisions that need to be made and the relevant sections of this guidance.

Section 1:

INTRODUCTION

Conduct matter

Investigation

Record conduct matter

Refer to IPCC

Must/should it

be referred?

Has the IPCC

determined

that it must be

investigated?

Must/should it

be recorded?

Section 6 – Conduct matters

Section 8 – Referrals

Section 9 – Investigations

Not a recordable

conduct matter

Handle in any other

manner (if any) the

appropriate authority

sees fit

If it is referred back to

the appropriate

authority, the

appropriate authority

may handle it in any

manner (if any)

it sees fit

Yes

8Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 151

Death or serious injury matters

1.15 This chart provides an overview of the various stages in dealing with a DSI matter

and the relevant sections of this guidance.

The Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011: changes to the police

complaints system

1.16 The policing landscape and the police complaints system underwent major change

in 2012. Amendments made to the police complaints system by the Government in

the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 were designed to streamline

and remove unnecessary bureaucracy from the system, ensure that complaints are

handled at the lowest appropriate level, and focus more on putting right the

complaint made by a member of the public.

Police accountability

1.17 Local policing bodies (for most areas of the country Police and Crime Commissioners)

are responsible for holding to account the chief ofﬁcer of their force for how policing

services are delivered in their force area. They should ensure that the chief ofﬁcer

has appropriate processes in place for dealing with complaints, conduct matters

and DSI matters.

Section 1:

INTRODUCTION

Investigation

Refer to IPCC

Record DSI matter

Has the IPCC

determined

that it must be

investigated?

Section 8 – Referrals

Section 7 – DSI matters

Section 9 – Investigations

If it is referred back

to the appropriate

authority, the

appropriate authority

may handle it in any

manner (if any) as

the appropriate

authority sees fit

DSI matter identified

Yes

9Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 151

1.18 Where it appears to a local policing body that the chief ofﬁcer of the force he or she

maintains has not complied with an obligation under Part 2 of the Police Reform

Act 2002 or has contravened an obligation, the local policing body may direct the

chief ofﬁcer to take whatever steps the local policing body thinks appropriate. The

chief ofﬁcer must comply with any directions given in such circumstances by the

local policing body.

1.19 The local policing body is also the appropriate authority for any complaints,

conduct matters, or DSI matters involving the chief ofﬁcer (or any acting chief

ofﬁcer) of the force that he or she oversees.

1.20 Chief ofﬁcers are responsible for holding to account everyone in their force. This

now includes responsibility as the appropriate authority for complaints and other

matters concerning senior ofﬁcers.

Recording complaints

1.21 Accurate and consistent recording practice plays a signiﬁcant part in ensuring

public conﬁdence in the complaints system and contributes to a sound evidence

base to inform the development of future policy and good practice. All complaints

must be recorded unless certain limited circumstances apply. These circumstances

are deﬁned in legislation.

1.22 The deﬁnition of a ‘complaint’ now includes direction and control matters. These

complaints must be recorded in the same way as complaints about police conduct.

The distinction between complaints about conduct and complaints about direction

and control is not important at the recording stage. It is, however, vital that complaints

are classiﬁed correctly as either direction and control matters or conduct. This is

because the right of appeal in relation to direction and control complaints is more

limited than the right of appeal for conduct complaints. This guidance stresses that

only a limited range of matters should be classiﬁed as direction and control.

Local handling

1.23 The complainant’s consent is no longer required in order to resolve a complaint

locally. However, for local resolution to be successful it must remain a two-way

dialogue. Complaints stand the best chance of being resolved to the complainant’s

satisfaction if he or she is taken seriously, and if the person handling the complaint

works with the complainant to understand the reason for his or her dissatisfaction

and what he or she would consider an appropriate outcome.

1.24 The IPCC believes that when it is carried out effectively and is used appropriately,

local resolution of less serious matters has a key part to play in the complaints

system and in ensuring public conﬁdence. Accordingly, this guidance places

increased emphasis on local resolution.

The Police Reform Act 2002 and The Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012.

Section 1:

INTRODUCTION

10Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 151

Disapplication and discontinuance

1.25 In certain limited circumstances local policing bodies and chief ofﬁcers now have

the discretion to disapply Schedule 3 of the Police Reform Act 2002 or to end an

investigation early where speciﬁc grounds are met. This means that they may be

able, in certain limited and speciﬁed circumstances, not to deal with the complaint

in accordance with Schedule 3 of the Police Reform Act 2002 or to discontinue a

local investigation without applying to the IPCC for permission. Where the local

policing body or chief ofﬁcer has used this discretion, the complainant may have a

right to appeal the disapplication or discontinuance decision.

Outcomes

1.26 Changes to the system have emphasised the importance of complaints and other

matters resulting in a proper outcome. The nature of a proper outcome is entirely

dependent on the facts and circumstances of any individual case, and so this guidance

does not attempt to prescribe what proper outcomes should be. The IPCC considers,

however, that any proper outcome will:

• take into account the initial complaint or allegation (where there is one)

• take into account the views of the complainant or interested person (where

there is a complainant or interested person)

• be based upon the facts established

• be appropriate to the seriousness of the circumstances.

Appeals

1.27 Chief ofﬁcers now have responsibility for handling certain appeals. All appeals

about the recording of complaints will continue to be dealt with by the IPCC. The

IPCC will also deal with any appeal concerning a complaint about the conduct of a

senior ofﬁcer or complaints that have been or must be referred to the IPCC.

1.28 For any other type of appeal, a test is set out in the regulations to determine

whether that appeal should be dealt with by the IPCC or by the relevant chief ofﬁcer.

This test should be applied to the substance of the complaint, not using hindsight

and information that has been gathered during the handling of the complaint. If a

complaint satisﬁes any of the criteria laid down in the test, then the relevant appeal

body is the IPCC. If not, the relevant appeal body is the chief ofﬁcer. See section 13

for detailed guidance on appeals.

1.29 It is anticipated that chief ofﬁcers will delegate many of their responsibilities for

complaint handling and determining appeals. (References to chief ofﬁcers in this

guidance include those people who have delegated authority to act on the chief

ofﬁcer’s behalf.) This is permitted by the regulations, but chief ofﬁcers should always

be mindful of the need for public conﬁdence in the arrangements they make. It is

important that those who might be affected by decisions made under delegated

powers can have conﬁdence that the person to whom the power is delegated is able

to act impartially.

Section 1:

INTRODUCTION

11Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 151

Unsatisfactory performance procedures

1.30 In addition to making recommendations and directions about misconduct

proceedings, in certain circumstances the IPCC is now able to recommend and direct

the use of unsatisfactory performance procedures (or equivalent procedures for police

staff members). It is important that these procedures are used where appropriate

in order to allow ofﬁcers and police staff members to improve their performance,

thereby improving the performance of the force as a whole. It is also vital that

appropriate authorities inform the complainant or interested person of the outcome

of unsatisfactory performance procedures as this is as relevant to him or her as the

outcome of any misconduct proceedings. See paragraphs 12.25-12.34 for more

information about unsatisfactory performance procedures.

IPCC oversight of relevant ofﬁce holders

1.31 The Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 introduced Police and Crime

Commissioners and the Mayor’s Ofﬁce for Policing and Crime. Collectively, Police

and Crime Commissioners, the Mayor’s Ofﬁce for Policing and Crime and their

appointed Deputies are called ‘relevant ofﬁce holders’.

1.32 The IPCC will be responsible for deciding whether a complaint or any indication that

a relevant ofﬁce holder has committed a criminal offence should be investigated

and, if so, how it will be investigated. This guidance does not apply to complaints

about relevant ofﬁce holders. It is likely that the IPCC will issue separate guidance

about dealing with such matters once we have experience of these cases.

1.33 The Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 brought contractors within

the jurisdiction of the IPCC. Matters relating to contractors will be dealt with in a

similar way to those relating to the police however they are governed by separate

regulations. This guidance does not apply to the handling of complaints, conduct

matters and DSI matters in relation to contractors. The IPCC will issue separate

guidance about dealing with such matters.

Section 1:

INTRODUCTION

12Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Section 2:

PROMOTING

ACCESS

2.1 All those in the police service and those overseeing it share responsibility for

increasing awareness of the police complaints system and promoting access to it.

This section sets out the minimum standards for providing information about the

system and making it accessible to those who need to use it.

The importance of an accessible system

2.2 Easy access to the complaints system is a vital component of securing public

conﬁdence in the system itself. Complaints can provide valuable feedback about

the service provided by the police and are an important source of learning to help

forces improve the service they offer.

2.3 All organisations involved with the complaints system have a responsibility for ensuring

that members of the public can easily and quickly ﬁnd information about how to make

a complaint and what to expect when their complaint is being dealt with.

2.4 IPCC research indicates that most people want to complain directly to their local

police force. However, it also shows that many complainants who come to the IPCC

do so because they have not succeeded in making a complaint direct to the police.

This underlines the need for forces and local policing bodies to have robust

strategies for promoting access.

Providing information and access

2.5 Chief ofﬁcers and local policing bodies should ensure that information about how to

complain is easily available. Forces and local policing bodies should provide their own

information about the complaints system. Information needs to be easy to ﬁnd, clear,

accurate, comprehensible and up to date. Forces should publish information on their

websites

as well as producing printed information, such as leaﬂets. Local policing

bodies should provide information on their websites about how to make a complaint

about the chief ofﬁcer in addition to signposting complaints information on the force

website. The IPCC expects forces and local policing bodies to include a link to

information about the complaints system on the front page of their websites.

Section 2:

PROMOTING ACCESS

IPCC (2010) Direct complaints survey: a survey seeking feedback from people who complain directly to the IPCC. IPCC research note 3.

www.ipcc.gov.uk has suggested structure and content for complaints information on force websites.

13Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 152

2.6 Information should be available when and where it may be needed, for example, in

police stations or other places where members of the public may have contact with

police. The information should tell people what they can and cannot expect from the

complaints system. Posters that convey information about the complaints system

should be displayed in public areas of police premises, particularly custody areas and

front desks. It is also useful to disseminate information through non-police premises

or organisations – for example libraries, Citizens Advice Bureaux, schools or voluntary

sector organisations.

2.7 Forces and local policing bodies should ensure that the information they provide

gives prominence to information about how to make a complaint direct to the force

(or local policing body where the complaint is about the conduct of a chief ofﬁcer or

acting chief ofﬁcer) rather than to the IPCC. It should make clear when the force or

local policing body is required to record complaints and that complaints made to the

IPCC will automatically be passed to the force or local policing body for recording

unless there are exceptional circumstances that justify not passing it on.

2.8 Forces and local policing bodies should also provide members of the public with

information about appeals and to whom an appeal may be made in different

circumstances. This information must always be provided to a complainant

whenever a decision that carries a right of appeal is communicated to him or her.

It is also best practice to advise the complainant of the precise date by which an

appeal should be submitted.

2.9 Forces and local policing bodies should make a range of channels available for

people who wish to make a complaint. These should include paper-based forms,

online forms, an email address and telephone lines.

2.10 Forces and local policing bodies should take into account a complainant’s or interested

person’s stated preference as to the method of communication (for example,

telephone call, email or letter) when providing him or her with information. However,

this guidance requires certain information to be provided in writing. This may not only

reﬂect a statutory requirement, but also ensures that a formal record exists of the

information provided or action taken. Written communication avoids uncertainty in

those situations where there is a dispute about what may have been said or have

taken place.

Complainants who need additional assistance

2.11 It is vital that the complaints system is available to all members of the public,

including those with special access requirements – especially as these are often

people whose conﬁdence in the police complaints system is lower. Provision should

also be made for people who wish to make a complaint or need information about

the complaints system in another language, including sign language, or who need

information such as leaﬂets, letters and documents provided in other languages or

formats such as Braille, audio or easy read.

2.12 Chief ofﬁcers and local policing bodies must take into account their obligations

under the Equality Act 2010.

Section 2:

PROMOTING

ACCESS

14Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 152

2.13 Some people may require adjustments to be made to usual procedures in order

to enable them to use the complaints system. It might be, for example, that:

• the complainant has learning difﬁculties;

• the complainant has mental health difﬁculties;

• the complainant is a young person under 16;

• English is not the complainant’s ﬁrst language;

• effective communication is through the spoken and not the written word;

• the complainant’s effective means of communication is sign language; or

• the complainant is vulnerable or disadvantaged in some other way.

2.14 It should always be presumed that a person who wishes to make a complaint

possesses the capacity to do so (i.e. the ability to make decisions) unless it is

established that he or she does not.

2.15 The assistance of a relative, carer or other representative may be necessary to

enable the complainant’s wishes to be expressed sufﬁciently for the complainant’s

intentions to be clear. However, in some cases, additional support may be required.

Forces and local policing bodies should always consider what adjustments may be

appropriate in the circumstances.

2.16 Chief ofﬁcers and local policing bodies should explicitly recognise the role of

feedback received through the complaints system within their diversity strategy

and use this diversity strategy to complement and support measures put in place

to ensure broad access to the complaints system.

Complaints made by young people under 16

2.17 A young person under 16 should not normally need to provide written permission

for a parent, guardian or advocate (for example, a teacher or social worker) to make a

complaint on his or her behalf. In many cases a young person who makes a complaint

against a person serving with the police will be supported by a parent, guardian, or

other appropriate adult. If this is not the case, this should not prevent him or her

from making a complaint.

2.18 The appropriate authority will need to consider whether a parent or guardian

should be informed of the complaint and involved in the complaints process or

whether another form of support would be appropriate to assist the young person

in navigating through the complaints system. The young person’s wishes in relation

to the involvement of a parent, guardian or advocate should be taken into account,

having regard to the principle in case law

that young people under the age of 16

are able to give valid consent (and refuse parental involvement) provided they have

sufﬁcient understanding and intelligence to enable them to understand fully

what is proposed.

Section 2:

PROMOTING

ACCESS

Gillick v West Norfolk & Wisbech Area Health Authority [1986] AC 112.

Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

2.19 The appropriate authority has a responsibility to ensure that a young person

understands the process and the potential outcomes when making a complaint.

Support should be provided to young people not only in their initial access to the

police complaints system, but throughout the handling of their complaint – for

example, ensuring that they understand the local resolution process or providing

them with appropriate support should they need to give evidence at criminal or

disciplinary proceedings.

2.20 When communicating with young people about complaints, the appropriate

authority should bear in mind that the system is complex and that it might be

necessary to take more steps to ensure that there is a proper explanation. The

appropriate authority should also take into account the fact that they may ﬁnd

the idea of dealing with a formal complaints process intimidating or off-putting.

Reassurance may be required about the framework for dealing with the complaint.

Section 2:

PROMOTING

ACCESS

Section 3:

COMPLAINTS

Section 3:

COMPLAINTS

3.1 This section sets out the framework for the initial stages of dealing with a complaint.

The way in which a complaint is dealt with at the outset can have a signiﬁcant effect

on the complainant’s perceptions of the complaints system as a whole. It is, therefore,

important that decisions are made and communicated in a timely manner and that

they are explained clearly.

3.2 The section covers:

• the initial handling of a complaint

• the legal deﬁnition of a complaint

• direction and control

• recording a complaint

• deciding how to handle a complaint.

Initial handling

3.3 The primary focus of the initial handling of a complaint should be to resolve it, with the

exception of certain serious complaints, which must be referred to the IPCC. The fact

that someone has made a complaint means that he or she is dissatisﬁed with the way

he or she has been treated or with the service that he or she has received. This needs to

be taken seriously and the concerns of the complainant should be addressed as soon

after receiving the complaint as possible. Speed is important as a complaint is more

likely to be successfully resolved if the force is seen to respond promptly. This gives

the complainant a clear message that his or her concerns are being taken seriously.

3.4 The police complaints system is not straightforward or easy to understand, particularly

for complainants. Those receiving complaints should ensure that complainants are

given the information they need to enable them to navigate through the system. This

means that when a complaint is submitted, whether in writing, over the telephone or

in person, the complainant should receive, as soon as possible, an explanation of the

possible ways in which the complaint may be dealt with.

3.5 When a complaint is received, the complainant should be advised who is dealing with

the complaint and given their contact details. The person dealing with the complaint

should establish exactly what the complaint is about and what the complainant

would regard as a satisfactory outcome. This should happen as soon as possible and, if

possible, at the time the complaint is received i.e. during the initial phone call or over

the counter. A personal approach is more likely to be successful than simply sending a

letter, although a written record will always be required.

Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

17Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

3.6 It is important to be realistic with the complainant about what may be a likely or

achievable outcome to his or her complaint and the reasons for this. While it may

not be possible to deliver the desired outcomes, a complainant who considers that

his or her complaint was handled well and that his or her views were properly

considered is less likely to remain dissatisﬁed at the conclusion of the process.

3.7 Chief ofﬁcers are responsible for ensuring that all ofﬁcers and police staff with public-

facing duties are aware of, and able to advise the public about, how to make a

complaint and what to expect if they do. Similarly, local policing bodies should ensure

that members of their staff are able to deal with complaints about the chief ofﬁcer. If

the ofﬁcer or staff member is not able to deal with the complaint him or herself, he or

she should take the contact details of the person and pass them to those responsible

for dealing with complaints. Someone from that team should make contact with the

member of the public as soon as possible and in any event within two working days.

However, earlier contact with the complainant may be required, for example, where

the complaint is particularly serious, requires referral to the IPCC (see timescales for

referral in text box on page 47) or the complainant is vulnerable.

3.8 Where it becomes apparent that those taking complaints are dealing with a

vulnerable or intimidated complainant it may be more appropriate to take an initial

account and make further arrangements to enable a fuller account to be taken by

those with appropriate experience or training. The person dealing with the complaint

should act professionally and offer reassurance when taking details of any allegation.

Deﬁnition of a complaint

3.9 A complaint is an expression of dissatisfaction by a member of the public about the

conduct of a person serving with the police. This could, for example, be about the

way the person has been treated or the service he or she has received. A complaint

does not need to be communicated in writing nor does it need to say explicitly it is

a complaint. It can simply be a statement of dissatisfaction.

3.10 The previous distinction between conduct and direction and control no longer

applies to the deﬁnition of a complaint. However, the distinction does impact upon

the complainant’s right of appeal.

Section 3:

COMPLAINTS

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Section 3:

COMPLAINTS

Who can complain?

3.11 Written consent should be clear and unambiguous. It need not be in English.

A complaint may be made by any of the following:

• a member of the public who claims that the conduct took place in relation

to him or her

• a member of the public who claims to have been adversely affected by the

conduct, even though it did not take place in relation to him or her

• a member of the public who claims to have witnessed the conduct

• a person acting on behalf of someone who falls within any of the three

categories above.

A person can only be considered as having been authorised to act on behalf of

another for the purposes of making a complaint if he or she has and is able to

produce written consent from that person.

Section 12, Police Reform Act 2002

The following persons cannot make a complaint under the Police Reform Act 2002:

i. a person who at the time of the alleged conduct was under the direction and

control of the same chief ofﬁcer as the person whose conduct it was; or

ii. a person serving with the police, a member of staff of the Serious Organised

Crime Agency or the National Policing Improvement Agency or a person on

relevant service (falling within the meaning of section 97(1)(a) or (d) of the Police

Act 1996) if he or she was on duty at the time that:

• the conduct took place in relation to him or her; or

• he or she was adversely affected by it; or

• he or she witnessed it.

Section 29, Police Reform Act 2002

Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance

3.12 This does not mean that a person serving with the police cannot raise concerns

about the conduct of other people serving within their own force. However, the

person serving with the police who raises the concern does not have any of the

statutory rights of a complainant. Police forces and local policing bodies should

ensure that there are adequate systems in place to support and protect people

serving with the police who want to raise concerns about the conduct of their

colleagues. This might include extending conﬁdentiality to anyone raising such

a concern, as far as this is possible and appropriate.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Section 3:

COMPLAINTS

Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance

3.13 In the ﬁrst instance, a person serving with the police should consider raising concerns

within his or her own force. However, as a supplement to existing force practices the

IPCC has a ‘report line’. This is a dedicated phone line and email address for the use of

people serving with the police wishing to report that someone serving with the police

may have committed a criminal offence or behaved in a way that would justify

misconduct proceedings. People serving with the police can get contact details of the

IPCC report line from their professional standards department, staff association or

trade union.

Partners and relatives

3.14 A partner or relative of someone who has served or is serving with the police will not

be able to make a complaint on that person’s behalf if the exclusion discussed in the

box above applies to the person who is serving or who has served with the police.

3.15 Forces should be open to the possibility that a partner or relative may make a complaint

in an attempt to circumvent the exclusions from the complaints system. Where this is

believed to be the case consideration should be given to whether the complaint falls

within the exemptions from recording as a vexatious complaint or as an abuse of

procedure (see paragraphs 3.17 to 3.20). For example, if a partner or relative of a person

serving with the police complains about a disciplinary process in relation to their family

member or the way he or she is being treated at work this may be considered to be an

abuse of process as there are proper means by which the person serving with the police

can raise such issues. The complaints system is not intended to deal with internal

employment issues.

3.16 It should not automatically be assumed, however, that a complaint made by a

partner or relative is either vexatious or an abuse of procedure as he or she might

legitimately claim to have witnessed, or been adversely affected by, the conduct

alleged and so may become a complainant in his or her own right.

Recording a complaint

3.17 ‘Recording’ in this context means that a record is made of the complaint giving it

formal status as a complaint under the Police Reform Act 2002. This means that it

has to be handled in accordance with this legislation and this guidance. Complaints

should be recorded in some form of register, which can be readily accessed and

inspected by the IPCC if required.

3.18 Some complaints will be ‘mixed’ i.e. a single complaint may involve a combination

of allegations directed at the chief ofﬁcer and at other ranks or personnel in the

wider police force. The local policing body and chief ofﬁcer should, therefore, have

procedures in place to direct the relevant parts of the complaint to the correct

appropriate authority to deal with (there is no requirement for consent from the

complainant to forward the complaint in these circumstances). Thereafter, they

should ensure that handling by each authority is co-ordinated as necessary.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Section 3:

COMPLAINTS

Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance

3.19 If a person’s complaint can be dealt with there and then, to the satisfaction of the

person making the complaint, there is no need to record it under the Police Reform

Act 2002, provided he or she conﬁrms that he or she is withdrawing the complaint.

However, it may be valuable to keep a log of such issues as there may still be learning

to be gained from them. In all other circumstances the complaint should be recorded

unless it falls within the exemptions listed below.

3.20 If it is apparent at the time of making a recording decision that one of these

exemptions applies to a complaint, the appropriate authority may decide not to

record the complaint. If the complaint is recorded (because it is not apparent at the

time of recording that an exemption applies), but the appropriate authority then

decides that the complaint should not be dealt with under the Police Reform Act

2002, it may consider whether disapplication is appropriate (see section 4).

3.21 The IPCC expects a recording decision to be made within ten working days of receipt

of a complaint or notiﬁcation, but ideally it should happen as soon as possible after

the complaint is received.

The appropriate authority must record the complaint unless:

i. it is satisﬁed that the subject matter of the complaint has been, or is being,

dealt with by criminal or disciplinary proceedings against the person whose

conduct it was;

ii. the complaint has been withdrawn; or

iii. the complaint falls within a description of complaints speciﬁed by the Police

(Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

The complaints that are speciﬁed by the Police (Complaints and Misconduct)

Regulations 2012 are those where the appropriate authority considers that:

i. the matter is already the subject of a complaint made by or on behalf of the

same complainant;

ii. the complaint discloses neither the name and address of the complainant nor

that of any other interested person and it is not reasonably practicable to

ascertain such a name or address;

iii. the complaint is vexatious, oppressive or otherwise an abuse of the procedures

for dealing with complaints;

iv. the complaint is repetitious; or

v. the complaint is fanciful.

Paragraph 2, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Regulation 3, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

21Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 153

3.22 If a decision is made not to record a complaint, there should be an audit trail which

shows that recording has been considered, the reason why the complaint has not

been recorded and what other action, if any, is to be taken.

3.23 Any complaint about direction and control should be recorded and handled in the

same way as a complaint about conduct. It is, however, important that complaints are

classiﬁed correctly as either direction and control or conduct as there is an important

distinction between them in relation to appeal rights. This is because the right of

appeal in relation to direction and control matters is much more limited than the right

of appeal for conduct complaints. There is no requirement to inform the complainant

of the classiﬁcation at this stage.

3.24 A ‘direction and control’ matter means a matter that relates to the direction and control

of a police force by the chief ofﬁcer or someone carrying out the chief ofﬁcer’s functions

for the time being. The IPCC considers the term direction and control to mean general

decisions about how a force is run, as opposed to the day-to-day decisions or actions

of persons serving with the police, which affect individual members of the public –

including those that affect more than one individual. ‘Conduct’ includes acts, omissions,

statements and decisions.

3.25 The table below shows some of the types of complaints that should be classiﬁed as

direction and control and those that should be classiﬁed as conduct. There will be

cases where it is not clear whether a matter is about direction and control. In such

cases, the IPCC expects the matter not to be treated as direction and control.

Section 3:

COMPLAINTS

Where a complaint is recorded under the Police Reform Act 2002, the appropriate

authority must supply:

• a copy of the record made of that complaint to the complainant; and

• subject to the matters below, a copy of the complaint to the person complained

against.

The copy of the complaint provided may keep the complainant’s or any other

person’s identity anonymous.

An appropriate authority may decide not to supply such a copy of a complaint if it

considers that to do so:

• might prejudice any criminal investigation or pending proceedings, or

• would otherwise be contrary to the public interest.

If an appropriate authority decides not to supply such a copy, it must keep the

decision under regular review.

Regulation 15 (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

Section 29, Police Reform Act 2002.

22Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 153

Off-duty conduct

3.26 Depending on the circumstances, off-duty conduct may fall within the Police

Reform Act 2002. If the complaint is about conduct which, if proved, discredits the

police service or undermines public conﬁdence in it then it may be recorded under

the Police Reform Act 2002.

Complaints about discriminatory behaviour

3.27 It is important that the police service is seen to police a diverse society and

community fairly. People may belong to one or more minority groups, but this

should not have a negative effect on the service they receive from the police.

3.28 People from minority groups may be reluctant to express their belief that a problem

they have experienced is rooted in discriminatory attitudes. This may, for example,

be because a complainant is reluctant to disclose his or her sexuality or to disclose a

mental health problem for fear that this may affect the investigator’s attitude to the

merit of a complaint. To overcome this, people dealing with complaints should

encourage complainants to explain why they think a person serving with the

police behaved the way that he or she did and demonstrate a willingness to

accept and investigate this aspect of the allegation.

3.29 In addition to training on processes, people dealing with complaints should receive

speciﬁc formal and informal training to develop their ability to identify discrimination.

This training should stress that discrimination is not always overt, and that it can

be necessary to look at all the circumstances of a particular case in order to see

Section 3:

COMPLAINTS

Direction and control

Operational management decisions

directed to the police force – including

force-wide crime initiatives and the

making of general strategic decisions

about how certain police powers

should be exercised.

The drafting of operational policing

policies and the process leading to

their approval.

Organisational decisions – including

decisions about the conﬁguration and

organisation of policing resources, where

ofﬁcers or police staff should be located,

how they should be managed, and what

equipment should be procured for them.

General policing standards in the force.

Conduct

The making of a speciﬁc decision

on the deployment of ofﬁcers for a

particular investigation or operation.

The decision to (or not to) arrest and

prosecute a particular suspect for a

certain crime.

Decisions about the deployment

of a particular tactic on a particular

occasion, and the use of that tactic.

The application of force policies, in

particular, circumstances where the

application of the policy involves an

ofﬁcer exercising their discretion.

Day-to-day operational decisions

made in response to a particular set

of circumstances that have arisen.

23Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 153

if discrimination can rightly be inferred from the surrounding facts. Such an exploration

of the surrounding circumstances should include, as a matter of course, consideration of

the standard practice and guidelines in relation to the particular activity complained

of, and the historic patterns of behaviour of the ofﬁcer(s) or staff member(s) to whose

conduct the investigation relates. Investigators should be alert to the need to undertake

this level of enquiry.

3.30 If a statement of complaint is taken this should cover what happened and what was

seen, heard, felt and thought. It is essential that allegations of discrimination are

given in sufﬁcient detail to identify why the complainant believes discrimination

was a factor. In particular, the following information should be recorded:

• what was it that made the complainant believe the person serving with the

police’s words or actions were discriminatory?

• did the complainant note any differences in the way he or she was treated

compared with others?

• did the complainant note any differences in the way that this person serving

with the police behaved compared with other persons serving with the police

(either on this or previous occasions)?

• was there anything about the person serving with the police’s language that

the complainant noted?

• what was the impact on the complainant?

• did anyone else witness the incident and were any comments or reactions

expressed to the complainant at the time or since?

Who can be complained about?

3.31 The person whose conduct can be complained about must be serving with the

police i.e. be a police ofﬁcer, police staff member or special constable. Volunteers

(other than special constables) are not covered by this deﬁnition.

3.32 The Police Reform Act 2002 and the Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations

2012 apply to contracted out staff who are designated as a detention officer or

escort ofﬁcer by a chief ofﬁcer insofar as the complaint relates to (or other instance

of misconduct involves) the carrying out of these functions for the purposes of any

power or duty imposed or conferred by the designation.

Complaints about people who no longer work for the police

Complaints relating to the conduct of a person who since the time of the conduct has

stopped serving with the police must be handled in the same way under the Police

Reform Act 2002 as any other complaint. However, the appropriate authority will not

be required to determine whether disciplinary proceedings should be brought against

that person whose conduct is the subject matter of a report.

Regulation 27, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

Section 3:

COMPLAINTS

24Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 153

3.33 It is recommended that in such circumstances, the investigator should seek to

obtain an explanation or statement from an individual who has left the force

although it may not be possible to compel him or her to co-operate.

3.34 The local resolution or investigation of the matter may provide an opportunity for an

explanation to be given to the complainant or, where relevant, the interested person.

It may also enable the police to learn lessons. Although disciplinary proceedings will

not result against someone who is no longer serving with the police, criminal

proceedings could be brought if appropriate.

Decisions not to notify or record a complaint

Where a chief ofﬁcer or a local policing body decides not to notify or record the

whole or any part of a complaint that has been received, he or she must notify

the complainant in writing of:

• the decision to take no action and, where applicable, to what part of the

complaint this decision relates;

• the grounds for that decision;

• the complainant’s right of appeal, where applicable (see section 13) and;

• that the right of appeal is to the IPCC; and

• the time limit for making an appeal.

Paragraph 3, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Regulation 11, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

Deciding how to handle a complaint

Referral

3.35 People who receive complaints should have an understanding of which complaints or

types of complaints need to be referred to the IPCC and which do not. For information

about referrals see section 8.

Local resolution

3.36 If a complaint does not need to be referred to the IPCC (and is unlikely to result in

voluntary referral), the appropriate authority must decide whether it is suitable for

local resolution. For information about local resolution see section 5.

Local investigation

3.37 Where a complaint is not suitable for local resolution it must be investigated. For

information about investigating a complaint see section 9.

Disapplication

3.38 If the appropriate authority believes a complaint should not be dealt with in line with

Schedule 3 of the Police Reform Act 2002 and it meets one of the disapplication grounds,

he or she may consider disapplication. For information about disapplication see section 4.

Section 3:

COMPLAINTS

25Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Section 4:

DISAPPLICATION

4.1 There are certain limited circumstances in which a recorded complaint does not have

to be dealt with under the Police Reform Act 2002. This is called disapplication and

means that an appropriate authority may disapply the requirements of Schedule 3 of

the Police Reform Act 2002 in relation to a complaint. The appropriate authority may

instead handle a recorded complaint in whatever manner it thinks ﬁt, including taking

no action on it. A disapplication may only take place if the complaint ﬁts one or more

of the grounds described at paragraphs 4.7 to 4.19.

4.2 Disapplication should only happen in relation to a small proportion of complaints.

It is available so that a complaint which falls within one of the grounds listed at

paragraphs 4.7 to 4.19 does not create an unnecessary burden on the force involved.

Disapplication should never be used simply because the complaint will be difﬁcult

to deal with or because of a problematic relationship with the complainant.

When can disapplication be carried out by the appropriate authority?

Disapplication can only be used for recorded complaints that:

• have been referred to the IPCC and it has referred the complaint back to the

appropriate authority;

• have been referred to the IPCC and it has determined the form of investigation; or

• are not required to be referred to the IPCC.

Before deciding to carry out a disapplication or making an application to the IPCC for

permission to disapply, the appropriate authority must write to the complainant at his

or her last known address inviting him or her to make representations. The letter must

state that the complainant has 28 days from the day following the date of the letter

to make any representations. Any representations that are made must be taken into

account before a ﬁnal decision to disapply or submit an application for permission to

the IPCC is taken as they may affect the appropriate authority’s decision.

Paragraphs 6 and 7, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Regulation 5, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

Section 4:

DISAPPLICATION

26Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 154

When the IPCC’s permission needs to be obtained

Where a complaint has been referred to the IPCC and has either been referred back

to the appropriate authority or the IPCC has determined the form of an investigation,

the IPCC’s permission must be obtained to disapply Schedule 3 of the Police Reform

Act 2002.

The appropriate authority must notify the complainant about the making of such

an application.

Paragraph 7, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

4.3 In practice, an application to disapply is usually only likely to occur when a

complaint has been referred back or on a local or supervised investigation,

and unlikely to occur on a managed or independent one.

While the application to disapply is being considered, the appropriate authority

must not take any action in relation to that complaint (other than those to obtain

and preserve evidence relating to it).

Paragraph 7, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Information to be sent to the IPCC

Any application to the IPCC to disapply Schedule 3 of the Police Reform Act 2002

must be in writing. The appropriate authority must provide:

• the application;

• a copy of the complaint;

• an explanation of the reasons for making the application;

• copies of any other relevant documents or materials held by it.

The appropriate authority must provide any other information required by the IPCC

to determine any application to disapply.

Regulation 5, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

4.4 Information provided to the IPCC with the application must include any evidence of

representations being sought from the complainant, any representations received

and how these were taken into account when deciding to make the application.

4.5 This information must be provided as soon as is reasonably practicable, unless

the IPCC notiﬁes the appropriate authority that it requires the information by a

speciﬁed deadline.

Section 4:

DISAPPLICATION

27Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 154

If the IPCC does not grant permission to disapply

If the IPCC does not grant permission for the appropriate authority to disapply, then

the complaint will be passed back to the appropriate authority to determine whether

it should locally resolve it and, if not, to investigate it.

Paragraph 7, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

4.6 When making this determination the appropriate authority should take into

account any decisions or directions made by the IPCC when the complaint was

originally referred.

The appropriate authority cannot make more than one application for permission

from the IPCC in respect of the same complaint.

Paragraph 7, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Grounds for disapplication

More than 12 months have elapsed between the incident, or the latest incident, giving

rise to the complaint and the making of the complaint and either that no good reason

for the delay has been shown or that injustice would be likely to be caused by the delay.

4.7 A 12-month delay is not enough on its own for this ground to apply. One or other of

these two criteria must be met as well. They are, however, separate. This means that if

12 months have passed between the incident (or the latest incident in a chain of events)

and the making of the complaint, and no good reason for the delay has been shown,

disapplication may be possible. Disapplication can take place on this ground even

though the delay is not likely to result in injustice. It also means that if 12 months have

passed between the incident (or the latest incident in a chain of events) and the making

of the complaint and injustice is likely to be caused by the delay, disapplication may be

possible even though good reason for the delay has been shown.

4.8 When deciding whether injustice is likely to be caused by the delay, the appropriate

authority should consider the need to balance this against any injustice potentially

caused by not investigating the complaint.

4.9 Each case should be considered on its merits and the complainant’s reasons for the

delay should be taken into account when making a decision about disapplication. This is

why it is important that appropriate authorities seek the complainant’s representations

about the delay, its reasons and whether any injustice is likely to be caused.

Section 4:

DISAPPLICATION

28Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 154

The matter is already the subject of a complaint made by or on behalf of the

same complainant.

4.10 A matter is considered to be already subject of a complaint where a complaint

is made against the same ofﬁcer originally complained of, relating to the same

subject matter and by (or on behalf of) the same complainant.

4.11 Any representations from the complainant may explain whether or how the new

complaint differs from the original complaint.

4.12 In practice, this ground applies where the handling of the original complaint is still

ongoing. If the original complaint has been dealt with, the appropriate authority

should consider whether the ‘repetitious’ disapplication ground applies (see

paragraph 4.17).

4.13 The appropriate authority should be able to provide evidence of the previous

complaint(s) and how the current one is already the subject of a complaint before

either deciding to disapply or making an application to the IPCC.

The complaint discloses neither the name and address of the complainant nor that of

any other interested person and it is not reasonably practicable to ascertain such a

name or address.

4.14 Where possible, the appropriate authority should attempt to discover the identity

and address of, and contact, the person making the complaint, or any other

interested person. There should be more than one attempt and various methods of

communication should be used. The appropriate authority should allow time for the

complainant or interested person to make contact before disapplying or making an

application to the IPCC. The time allowed should be determined on a case-by-case

basis, but should be reasonable, taking into account the circumstances and subject

matter of the complaint.

The complaint is vexatious, oppressive or otherwise an abuse of the procedures for

dealing with complaints.

4.15 It is important to note that it is the complaint itself that must be judged vexatious,

oppressive or an abuse, not the complainant. Consideration of this ground should

therefore focus primarily on the current complaint. The complainant’s past complaint

history may, however, be taken into account where it is relevant to show that the

current complaint is vexatious, oppressive or an abuse.

4.16 The appropriate authority should be able to demonstrate with evidence a reasonable

belief that the complaint is vexatious, oppressive or an abuse of process before

deciding to disapply or making an application to the IPCC. Some assessment of the

complaint will be required in order to demonstrate this.

Section 4:

DISAPPLICATION

29Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 154

The complaint is repetitious.

4.17 Any representations from the complainant may explain whether or how the new

complaint differs from the original complaint or conduct matter.

It is not reasonably practicable to complete the investigation of the complaint or any

other procedures under Schedule 3 to the Police Reform Act 2002.

4.18 Before considering a disapplication on this ground the appropriate authority

should ensure that:

• reasonable efforts have been made to contact the complainant (i.e. more than

one attempt) and to gain his or her co-operation, using a range of appropriate

methods, for example, letter, email or telephone;

• efforts were made to work through the complainant’s representative;

• practical help was made available to support a complainant with

speciﬁc needs;

• reasonable efforts have been made to overcome any obstacle preventing

completion of the investigation or any other procedure;

• reasonable efforts have been made to overcome any obstacle preventing the

complaint being dealt with; and

• the impact of the refusal or failure is sufﬁcient to justify not completing an

investigation or any other procedure under Schedule 3.

4.19 There are many reasons why it may not be practicable to communicate with the

complainant or person acting on his or her behalf. Where there is sufﬁcient information

to proceed with an investigation of the complaint or any other procedure this should be

carried out. If it is not possible to proceed without further communication with the

complainant, disapplication may be appropriate.

Partial disapplication

4.20 Where a complaint is made up of multiple allegations, only some may be suitable

for disapplication. For example, some aspects of a complaint may be repetitious

while others are not. In such cases disapplication may be carried out, or applied for,

in respect of those parts of the complaint.

Appeals against the decision to subject the complaint to disapplication

4.21 There is a right of appeal against any decision by the appropriate authority to

disapply (except where the complaint relates to a direction and control matter

or where the IPCC gave permission for the disapplication). For further information

about this see paragraphs 13.43 to 13.60.

Section 4:

DISAPPLICATION

30Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Section 5:

LOCAL

HANDLING

5.1 The great majority of complaints will not need to be referred to the IPCC and will be

handled, at least initially, by the appropriate authority (usually forces themselves).

Local handling covers a wide range of activity. Some can be dealt with through local

resolution. This is a process which focuses on resolving the complaint in the most

appropriate way, and which therefore allows the appropriate authority to work with

a complainant to take the necessary action (see below for more detail). However,

local resolution cannot be used for complaints that reach a certain threshold of

seriousness. Those complaints must be dealt with by a formal local investigation,

which may result in disciplinary or criminal sanctions, and carry a right of appeal

to the IPCC if the complainant is dissatisﬁed with the outcome.

5.2 It is important that appropriate authorities understand which complaints can be

dealt with by local resolution and which require investigation. This section describes

the process of local resolution and the threshold test to be applied in using it.

Section 9 describes the process of local investigation.

5.3 The primary focus of the person handling a complaint, regardless of the process

followed, should be to resolve the complaint.

5.4 When a complaint is made, the person dealing with it should establish exactly what the

complaint is about and what the complainant would regard as a satisfactory outcome.

A personal approach to this is more likely to be successful than sending a letter as a

conversation will allow for any issues or concerns to be explored in more detail.

5.5 It is important to be clear with the complainant about what may be a realistic

outcome to his or her complaint and the reasons for this. While it may not be possible

to deliver the desired outcome, an explanation to the complainant at an early stage

will help them to understand what is likely to happen as a result of their complaint.

5.6 The person handling the complaint should discuss with the complainant the actions

that may be taken to deal with their complaint. The aim should be to engage in a

dialogue about how the complaint will be dealt with. An effective relationship with

the complainant from the outset should assist in the handling of the complaint and

reduce the likelihood of an eventual appeal. It is also important when speaking to

the complainant that the focus is on the actions to be taken in order to achieve a

satisfactory outcome, rather than on the process to be followed (i.e. local resolution

or investigation).

Section 5:

LOCAL HANDLING

31Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 155

5.7 The complainant should be informed of what practical action or learning may result

from their complaint. It is important that appropriate authorities demonstrate to

complainants and communities their willingness to learn from the complaints made

against them and demonstrate that the complaints process does lead to improved

police practice.

Local resolution

5.8 Local resolution is a flexible process that can be adapted to the needs of the

complainant. The complaint will be handled in the main at a local managerial level,

not within professional standards departments.

5.9 Although local resolution will not result in disciplinary proceedings, the manager of the

person complained about may take management action or formal action under the

unsatisfactory performance procedures (for police ofﬁcers) or capability procedures

(for police staff members) during, or as a result of, the complaints process.

Complaints suitable for local resolution

5.10 When a complaint has been recorded and there is no requirement to refer it to the

IPCC and it is not being referred voluntarily, the appropriate authority must decide

whether the complaint is suitable for local resolution.

When a complaint has been recorded and there is no requirement to refer it to the

IPCC and it is not being referred voluntarily, the appropriate authority must decide

whether the complaint is suitable for local resolution.

A complaint must meet both of the following conditions to be suitable for

local resolution:

• the appropriate authority is satisﬁed that the conduct that is being complained

about (even if it were proved) would not justify bringing criminal or disciplinary

proceedings against the person whose conduct is complained about; and

• the appropriate authority is satisﬁed that the conduct complained about (even

if it were proved) would not involve the infringement of a person’s rights under

Article 2 or 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

If a complaint does not meet these conditions, it is not suitable for local resolution

and must be investigated by the appropriate authority.

Paragraph 6, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Section 5:

LOCAL

HANDLING

32Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 155

5.11 This assessment should be made taking the complaint at face value. If a complaint

meets these conditions, it may be dealt with by way of local resolution, and the

expectation is that it will be locally resolved unless there is a reason why this is not

possible. If there is doubt whether a complaint satisﬁes either of the conditions, it is

advisable to err on the side of caution and not treat it as suitable for local resolution.

5.12 Where a pattern of behaviour is identiﬁed in a person serving with the police, the

person determining whether the complaint is suitable for local resolution should

consider carefully whether local resolution is appropriate. Local resolution may be the

proportionate response, for example to a complaint of incivility. However, if there have

been similar or previous complaints that have also been resolved locally the IPCC

encourages the appropriate authority to consider whether there are underlying

reasons for the pattern of behaviour which may justify the bringing of disciplinary

proceedings in respect of the latest conduct complained about.

Local resolution following referral

5.13 An appropriate authority may consider local resolution of a complaint that has

been referred to the IPCC if the IPCC has determined that an investigation is not

necessary and referred the complaint back to the appropriate authority.

5.14 If the IPCC has determined that an investigation is necessary and how the complaint

should be investigated, but the appropriate authority wishes to resolve the complaint

locally, an application for local resolution must be submitted to the IPCC. However, this

should not be a routine occurrence. Applications should be made only where there is

new information or evidence, which was not reasonably available at the time of the

referral, to suggest that local resolution would be appropriate.

The appropriate authority cannot make more than one application for the IPCC’s

approval to the determination that a complaint is suitable for local resolution in

respect of the same complaint.

Paragraph 6, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Ways of resolving the complaint

5.15 Local resolution is a flexible process that may be adapted to the needs of the

complainant and the individual complaint. The actions taken to resolve a complaint

locally will depend on the substance of the complaint and the discussion that has

taken place with the complainant. Possible actions that could be taken include:

• resolution over the counter or by telephone

• providing information and explanation

• an apology on behalf of the appropriate authority or an apology from the

person complained about (if that person has agreed to an apology)

• a written explanation of the circumstances and any action taken

Section 5:

LOCAL

HANDLING

33Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 155

• mediation between the complainant and the person complained about, either

directly or indirectly

• a change to policy or procedures

• learning shared within the force

• taking some investigative steps to establish further information.

5.16 Mediation can be a productive way to deal with complaints that are suitable for local

resolution. A mediation process, which will usually involve a third party to mediate

between the complainant and the ofﬁcer complained against, is more likely to

increase satisfaction for both parties as it allows for both the complainant and the

person complained against each to describe their experiences.

Action plans

5.17 The details of how a speciﬁc complaint will be resolved locally are best documented in

an action plan that outlines the steps to be taken. The action plan should be discussed

with the complainant and he or she should have an opportunity to comment on it. This

will help reach a shared understanding of the actions to be taken and will be a useful

record of any agreements reached. Any step in an action plan should be both effective

and achievable; an action plan that unduly raises a complainant’s expectations and fails

to deliver will negatively affect the complainant’s conﬁdence in the police. If a step in an

action plan cannot be completed, the reasons for this should be recorded and explained

to the complainant.

5.18 The complainant should be provided with a copy of the agreed action plan.

Communication

During a local resolution process, the complainant and person complained against

must be given the opportunity, as soon as practicable, to make comments about

the complaint.

Regulation 6, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

5.19 Participation by the person complained about should be actively encouraged. Local

resolution is not seeking to establish blame or wrongdoing, but is aiming to resolve

the complaint. It should generally be expected that the person complained about

will comment upon the complaint.

A record must be made as soon as practicable of the outcome of the local resolution

procedure. A copy of this record must be given to the person complained against

and the complainant.

Regulation 6, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

Section 5:

LOCAL

HANDLING

34Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 155

Statements

A statement made by any person for the purposes of a local resolution is not admissible

in any subsequent criminal, civil or disciplinary proceedings (except where it is an

admission to a matter that has not been subjected to local resolution).

Paragraph 8, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

5.20 There is no legal power or requirement to issue a notice of investigation to the

person complained against as part of the local resolution process.

Appeal against local resolution

5.21 Where a complaint has been resolved locally, the complainant will have a right of

appeal about the outcome of the local resolution (unless the complaint relates to a

direction and control matter).

See paragraphs 13.61 to 13.67 for more information

on appeals.

5.22 At the conclusion of any local resolution process, the appropriate authority must

ensure that the complainant is informed, in writing, of:

• the outcome of the local resolution (and sent a copy of the record of the

outcome)

• the right of appeal

• the identity of the relevant appeal body (and, if it is the IPCC, the reason)

• that there is no further right of appeal to the IPCC (where the relevant appeal

body is the chief ofﬁcer)

• the timescale in which the appeal must be received (28 days).

It is not possible to locally resolve the complaint

Where it becomes apparent to the appropriate authority during the course of an

attempt at local resolution that it is not possible to resolve the complaint using local

resolution or the complaint is, for any other reason, not suitable for local resolution,

arrangements must be made for the complaint to be investigated by the

appropriate authority.

In those circumstances, no-one who was involved in the attempt at local resolution

can be appointed to investigate the complaint or to assist with the investigation.

Paragraph 8, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Paragraph 8A, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Section 5:

LOCAL

HANDLING

35Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 155

5.23 There may be occasions, either because the relationship between the complainant

and the force has irretrievably broken down, or because the complainant’s desired

outcome to the complaint is unachievable, where there is no possibility of engaging

in a two-way resolution process. Additionally, it is unlikely to satisfy a complainant if

he or she feels that local resolution has been imposed against his or her express

wishes. In these instances a local investigation may be the most practical and

satisfactory means of dealing with the complaint.

5.24 Detailed guidance on carrying out investigations can be found in section 9 of

this guidance.

5.25 An investigation carried out in these circumstances will carry a right of appeal. The way

in which a complaint is dealt with (i.e. whether it is locally resolved or investigated) has

no bearing on who considers the appeal. This is based purely on the complaint(s) made

at the beginning of the process (see paragraphs 13.11 to 13.17 for more information

about the relevant appeal body).

Section 5:

LOCAL

HANDLING

36Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 156

Section 6:

CONDUCT

MATTERS

6.1 This section sets out the framework for the initial stages of dealing with a

conduct matter.

6.2 The section covers:

• the deﬁnition of a conduct matter

• how a conduct matter should be recorded

• which conduct matters must be referred to the IPCC.

Deﬁnition of a conduct matter

Subject to some limited exceptions a conduct matter is any matter about which

there is not or has not been a complaint, where there is an indication (whether from

the circumstances or otherwise) that a person serving with the police may have

committed a criminal offence or behaved in a manner which would justify

disciplinary proceedings.

Section 12, Police Reform Act 2002

6.3 It is vital that conduct matters are recognised and dealt with, both to deal with

the issues and as part of the learning and improvement process for the force and

the individual.

6.4 Conduct matters may come to light where a person who is prevented from being a

complainant by the Police Reform Act 2002 raises issues that satisfy the deﬁnition

of a conduct matter. The person raising the issue may be treated as an interested

person if the matter is treated as a recordable conduct matter.

Recording a conduct matter

6.5 ‘Recording’ in this context means that a record is made of the conduct matter giving

it formal status under the Police Reform Act 2002. This means that it has to be

handled formally in accordance with the Police Reform Act 2002 and this guidance.

Section 6:

CONDUCT MATTERS

37Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 156

Conduct matters arising in civil proceedings

6.6 There is a duty on chief ofﬁcers and local policing bodies to identify and deal with

conduct matters that come to their attention as a result of civil proceedings. Where a

chief ofﬁcer or local policing body receives a notiﬁcation that civil proceedings relating

to any matter have been brought or are likely to be brought against him or her by a

member of the public, he or she should make an initial assessment about whether

any complaint has been made about the same conduct. If so, he or she should deal

with the complaint in accordance with the guidance on handling complaints.

If no complaint has been made, the chief ofﬁcer or local policing body must assess

whether those proceedings involve or would involve a conduct matter (see paragraphs

6.2 to 6.4). If so, then the chief ofﬁcer or local policing body must ﬁrst decide if he or she

is the relevant appropriate authority.

If the chief ofﬁcer or local policing body is not the relevant appropriate authority,

he or she must notify the relevant appropriate authority of the proceedings and

the circumstances that suggest it involves, or would involve, a conduct matter.

If the chief ofﬁcer or local policing body is the appropriate authority then he or she

must determine whether there is a requirement, or it would be appropriate, to refer

the matter to the IPCC. If so, then the matter must be recorded, unless he or she is

satisﬁed the matter has been or is already being dealt with by criminal or disciplinary

proceedings against the person to whose conduct the matter relates.

In any other case, the appropriate authority must determine whether the matter

is repetitious within the meaning of regulation 7(3) of the Police (Complaints and

Misconduct) Regulations 2012. If the matter is not repetitious then the appropriate

authority must record the matter unless it is satisfied the matter has been or is

already being dealt with by criminal or disciplinary proceedings against the person

to whose conduct the matter relates.

In any other case, the appropriate authority may record the matter, but is not

obliged to do so.

Paragraph 10, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Regulation 7, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

6.7 Conduct matters should be recorded as soon as practicable after they have come to

light and the decision has been made that they must be recorded.

Where a conduct matter is recorded, but there is no requirement to refer the matter

to the IPCC and the matter is not being referred voluntarily, the appropriate authority

may handle the matter in whatever other manner it may determine, including taking

no action.

Paragraph 10, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Section 6:

CONDUCT

MATTERS

38Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 156

6.8 Appropriate authorities should ensure that there is clear local guidance about who

is responsible for identifying conduct matters in civil proceedings and ensuring

that they are handled effectively and efﬁciently.

6.9 There is no cut-off for recording a conduct matter arising from a civil claim,

i.e. where the events took place some years previously. However, appropriate

authorities can consider whether there are grounds for discontinuing an

investigation into a conduct matter (see section 10).

Conduct matters in other cases

Where a conduct matter comes to the attention of a chief ofﬁcer or local policing

body (other than as a result of civil proceedings) and he or she is the relevant appropriate

authority, an assessment must ﬁrst be made to determine whether it involves conduct

which, assuming it has taken place:

• appears to have resulted in the death or serious injury of any person;

• has had an adverse effect on a member of the public; or

• falls within a description speciﬁed in the Police (Complaints and Misconduct)

Regulations 2012, namely:

i. a serious assault, as deﬁned in paragraphs 8.7 to 8.10 of this guidance;

ii. a serious sexual offence, as deﬁned in paragraphs 8.11 and 8.12 of

this guidance;

iii. serious corruption, as deﬁned in paragraphs 8.13-8.17 of this guidance;

iv. a criminal offence or behaviour which is liable to lead to misconduct

proceedings and which in either case was aggravated by discriminatory

behaviour on the grounds of a person’s race, sex, religion, or other status

identiﬁed in paragraph 8.18 of this guidance;

v. a relevant offence (see box under Relevant offence in section 8);

vi. conduct whose gravity or other exceptional circumstances make it

appropriate to record the matter in which the conduct is involved; or

vii. conduct which is alleged to have taken place in the same incident as one

in which conduct within sub-paragraphs (i) to (v) is alleged.

If so, the appropriate authority must determine whether it is required, or it would be

appropriate, to refer the matter to the IPCC. If the appropriate authority determines

that it is required, or it would be appropriate, to refer the matter to the IPCC then it

must record the matter, unless it is satisﬁed that it has been or is already being dealt

with by criminal or disciplinary proceedings against the person to whose conduct the

matter relates.

In any other case, the appropriate authority must determine whether the matter

is repetitious within the meaning of regulation 7(3) of the Police (Complaints and

Misconduct) Regulations 2012. If the matter is not repetitious then the appropriate

authority must record the matter, unless it is satisﬁed that it has been or is already

being dealt with by criminal or disciplinary proceedings against the person whose

conduct the matter relates.

Section 6:

CONDUCT

MATTERS

39Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 156

6.10 Conduct matters should be recorded as soon as practicable after they have come

to light and the decision has been made that they must be recorded.

Conduct matters involving allegations of discrimination

6.11 Paragraphs 3.27 to 3.30 of this guidance in relation to complaints will also be relevant

to dealing with interested persons in relation to such conduct matters.

Conduct matters relating to people who no longer work for the police

Conduct matters relating to the conduct of a person who since the time of the conduct

has stopped being a person serving with the police must be handled in the same way

under the Police Reform Act 2002 as any other conduct matter. However, the appropriate

authority will not be required to determine whether disciplinary proceedings should be

brought against that person whose conduct is the subject matter of a report.

Regulation 27, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

6.12 The investigation of the conduct matter may provide an opportunity for an

explanation to be given to an interested person. It may also enable the police to learn

lessons. Although disciplinary proceedings will not result against someone who is no

longer serving with the police, criminal proceedings could be brought if appropriate.

Referral of conduct matters to the IPCC

6.13 For information about referring conduct matters to the IPCC see section 8 of

this guidance.

In any other case, the appropriate authority may record the matter, but is not

obliged to do so.

Where a conduct matter is recorded, but there is no requirement to refer the matter

to the IPCC and it is not being referred voluntarily, then the appropriate authority

may handle the matter in whatever other manner it may determine, including

taking no action.

The IPCC may direct the appropriate authority to record a matter that has come

to the IPCC’s attention which is a recordable conduct matter but has not been

recorded. The appropriate authority must comply with that direction.

Paragraph 11, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Regulation 7, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

Section 6:

CONDUCT

MATTERS

40Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 157

Section 7:

DEATH OR

SERIOUS

INJURY

MATTERS

7.1 This section sets out the framework for the initial stages of dealing with a death

or serious injury (DSI) matter.

7.2 The section covers:

• the deﬁnition of a DSI matter

• how a DSI matter should be recorded

• the referral of DSI matters to the IPCC.

Deﬁnition of a DSI matter

A DSI matter means any circumstances (unless the circumstances are or have been

the subject of a complaint or amount to a conduct matter) in, or as a result of

which, a person has died or sustained serious injury and:

• at the time of death or serious injury the person had been arrested by a person

serving with the police and had not been released or was otherwise detained in

the custody of a person serving with the police; or

• at or before the time of death or serious injury the person had contact of any kind

– whether direct or indirect – with a person serving with the police who was

acting in the execution of his or her duties and there is an indication that the

contact may have caused – whether directly or indirectly – or contributed to the

death or serious injury. However, this sub-category excludes contact that a person

who suffered the death or serious injury had whilst he or she was acting in the

execution or his or her duties as a person serving with the police.

Section 12, Police Reform Act 2002

‘Serious injury’ means a fracture, a deep cut, a deep laceration or an injury causing

damage to an internal organ or the impairment of any bodily function.

Section 29, Police Reform Act 2002

Section 7:

DEATH OR SERIOUS INJURY MATTERS

41Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 157

Recording a DSI matter

Where a DSI matter comes to the attention of a chief ofﬁcer or local policing body, and

he or she is the relevant appropriate authority, he or she must record that matter.

Paragraph 14A, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

7.3 DSI matters should be recorded as soon as practicable after they are identiﬁed

bearing in mind the timescale for referral set out in the text box on page 47.

The IPCC may direct the appropriate authority to record a DSI matter that has come to

the IPCC’s attention, but has not been recorded. The appropriate authority must comply

with that direction.

Paragraph 14A, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Referral of DSI matters

7.4 For information about referrals see section 8 of this guidance.

Section 7:

DEATH OR

SERIOUS

INJURY

MATTERS

42Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 158

Section 8:

REFERRALS

8.1 Referral to the IPCC is an important part of ensuring public conﬁdence in the

independence, accountability and integrity of the police complaints system.

8.2 This section explains:

• what must be referred to the IPCC

• the IPCC’s decision when it receives a referral

• the types of investigation that may follow.

Complaints that must be referred to the IPCC

Appropriate authorities must refer to the IPCC:

• complaints alleging that the conduct complained of has resulted in death or

serious injury;

• complaints which fall within the mandatory referral criteria (see below);or

• complaints which the IPCC notiﬁes the appropriate authority that it requires

to be referred regardless of whether the complaint is already being investigated

by any person or the IPCC has considered it.

However, a complaint that has already been referred to the IPCC is not required

to be referred again unless the IPCC so directs.

Paragraph 4, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

8.3 Appropriate authorities should notify the IPCC where concerns or issues arise later

which indicate that the matter should be referred again.

Section 8:

REFERRALS

43Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 158

Conduct matters that must be referred to the IPCC

Appropriate authorities must refer to the IPCC recordable conduct matters which:

• relate to any incident or circumstances in or in consequence of which a person

has died or suffered serious injury;

• fall within the mandatory referral criteria (see below);or

• the IPCC notiﬁes the appropriate authority that it requires the matter to be

referred regardless of whether the conduct matter is already being investigated

by any person or the IPCC has considered it previously.

However, a conduct matter that has already been referred to the IPCC does not have

to be referred again unless the IPCC so directs.

Paragraph 13, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

8.4 Appropriate authorities should notify the IPCC where concerns or issues arise later

which indicate that the matter should be referred again.

Referral of death or serious injury (DSI) matters

All DSI matters must be referred to the IPCC.

However, a DSI matter that has already been referred to the IPCC does not have to

be referred again unless the IPCC so directs.

Paragraph 14C, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Section 8:

REFERRALS

44Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 158

Mandatory referral criteria

The appropriate authority must refer complaints and recordable conduct matters

that include allegations of conduct which constitutes:

• serious assault

• serious sexual offence

• serious corruption

• criminal offence or behaviour which is liable to lead to misconduct proceedings

and which, in either case, is aggravated by discriminatory behaviour on the

grounds of a persons race, sex, religion or other status identiﬁed in paragraph

8.18 of this guidance

• a relevant offence, or

• complaints or conduct matters which are alleged to have arisen from the same

incident as anything falling within these criteria.

An appropriate authority must also refer complaints which arise from the same

incident about which there is a complaint alleging that the conduct complained

of resulted in death or serious injury.

Regulation 4 and 7, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

8.5 Where there is doubt about whether a complaint or recordable conduct matter

must be referred, the IPCC encourages referral. The appropriate authority can seek

the IPCC’s advice about general policy on referrals or about whether to refer a

specific incident or allegation.

8.6 If further evidence or information is obtained indicating that an incident was more

serious than ﬁrst thought and if it meets the criteria for referral, the matter should

be referred to the IPCC. Similarly, further evidence or information might prompt

consideration about re-referral so that the mode of investigation can be reviewed.

Where a referral is made some time after the original incident, an explanation

should be given indicating the evidence that has come to light requiring referral

(or re-referral) of the matter.

Deﬁnitions of referral criteria

Serious assault

8.7 ‘Serious assault’ is conduct that results in an injury that amounts to actual bodily

harm or a more serious injury.

8.8 ‘Serious assault‘ is interpreted in accordance with the law on what constitutes an

assault occasioning actual bodily harm contrary to Section 47 of the Offences

Against the Person Act 1861. The offence is committed when a person assaults

another, thereby causing actual bodily harm to that other person. One factor in law

that distinguishes a charge under Section 39 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988

(common assault) from one under Section 47 is the degree of injury.

Section 8:

REFERRALS

45Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 158

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) legal guidance on the charging standards for the

offence of assault occasioning actual bodily harm should be applied in determining

whether an offence is one of assault occasioning actual bodily harm rather than

common assault.

8.9 Any attempt, incitement or conspiracy to commit any offence referred to above

must also be referred to the IPCC.

8.10 Where a person is injured as a result of the conduct of a person serving with the

police, forces should ﬁrst consider whether the injury is a serious injury or one which

must be referred. If not, they should ask themselves whether there is anything

about the conduct or the circumstances in which the injury was sustained which

points to the need for a voluntary referral. For injuries occurring once a person is in

custody, the threshold for force to be necessary or proportionate is higher.

Serious sexual offences

8.11 The term ‘serious sexual offences’ includes:

• all offences under the Sexual Offences Acts 1956 to 2003 that must be tried

in the Crown Court; or

• any other offences under these Acts which appear, to an appropriate authority,

to be an offence for which the individual concerned, if convicted, would be

likely to receive a sentence of more than six months.

8.12 Any attempt, incitement or conspiracy to commit any offence referred to above

must also be referred to the IPCC.

Serious corruption

8.13 The term serious corruption refers to conduct that includes:

• any attempt to pervert the course of justice or other conduct likely seriously to

harm the administration of justice, in particular the criminal justice system;

• payments or other beneﬁts or favours received in connection with the

performance of duties amounting to an offence for which the individual

concerned, if convicted, would be likely to receive a sentence of more than

six months;

• abuse of authority;

• corrupt controller, handler or covert human intelligence source

(CHIS) relationships;

• provision of conﬁdential information in return for payment or other beneﬁts or

favours where the conduct goes beyond a possible prosecution for an offence

under Section 55 of the Data Protection Act 1998;

• extraction and supply of seized controlled drugs, ﬁrearms or other material; or

• attempts or conspiracies to do any of the above.

Section 8:

REFERRALS

46Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 158

8.14 The law requires that allegations of serious corruption are referred to the IPCC

without delay. It is therefore not appropriate to wait until there is sufﬁcient

information to make an arrest.

8.15 Where an allegation of serious corruption is made or potential serious corruption

is identiﬁed this may require covert investigation. This should not prevent or delay

referral to the IPCC.

8.16 The IPCC expects covert cases to be referred if any of the following factors

are present:

• reasonable suspicion that a criminal offence has been committed

• the investigation has moved to an operational phase

• covert intrusive tactics are about to be deployed

• the allegations are extremely sensitive or likely to have an adverse

impact on public conﬁdence.

8.17 If it is unclear whether any of these factors are present the case should

be discussed with the IPCC to establish whether referral is necessary.

Criminal offences and behaviour liable to lead to misconduct proceedings and which

in either case is aggravated by discriminatory behaviour.

8.18 This refers to any criminal offence or other behaviour liable to lead to misconduct

proceedings that is aggravated by discrimination on the grounds of a person’s:

• age;

• disability;

• gender reassignment;

• marriage and civil partnership;

• pregnancy and maternity;

• race;

• religion or belief;

• sex; or

• sexual orientation.

8.19 The form of the alleged discrimination may be direct through language or behaviour,

for example, the use of offensive and discriminatory words or use of stereotypes

to describe individuals. The complainant or interested person may allege that the

criminal offence or behaviour was motivated by discrimination. He or she may allege

treatment which amounts to discrimination by comparison with the treatment given

to others. While it is not for the complainant to prove that the person serving with the

police discriminated against him or her it is important that when raising allegations

about the treatment he or she received that he or she is able to identify (where

possible) how that treatment was discriminatory. The person dealing with the matter

should encourage the complainant or interested person to provide as much information

as possible as to why they consider they were discriminated against. It is equally

possible that the complainant or interested person does not allege discrimination,

Section 8:

REFERRALS

47Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 158

but that the investigator believes discrimination is a factor (see paragraphs 3.27

to 3.30 and 9.17 to 9.23 for additional information on dealing with allegations

of discrimination).

Relevant offence

‘A relevant offence’ is deﬁned as any offence for which the sentence is ﬁxed by law or

any offence for which a person of 18 years and over (not previously convicted) may

be sentenced to imprisonment for seven years or more (excluding any restrictions

imposed by Section 33 of the Magistrates Court Act 1980).

Regulation 1, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

Matters which the IPCC requires to be referred to it (‘call in’)

8.20 The IPCC may require any complaint or recordable conduct matter to be referred

to it by the appropriate authority. This power of call in is exercisable irrespective of

whether the matter is already being investigated or has previously been considered

by the IPCC.

8.21 If the IPCC calls a matter in, the appropriate authority must provide all relevant

information at, or as soon as practicable after, the time of referral.

Deadlines for referral

A mandatory referral must be made without delay and in any case not later than

the end of the day after the day it ﬁrst becomes clear that it is a matter which must

be referred.

Regulations 4, 7 and 8, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

8.22 If necessary referrals can be made via the IPCC’s on-call number.

Where the IPCC calls a matter in, it must be referred without delay and in any case

by the end of the day after the day the IPCC notiﬁes the appropriate authority that

it must be referred.

Regulations 4 and 7, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

8.23 The process of referral must not delay any initial action by an appropriate authority

to secure or preserve evidence especially in relation to incident scene management.

Section 8:

REFERRALS

48Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 158

8.24 In any case, when referring a matter, an appropriate authority must provide to the

IPCC as much relevant information as possible to ensure it makes informed decisions.

The need to provide information should be balanced against the timeliness of making

the referral, but the following list gives some examples of information which, where

available and relevant, will help the decision maker:

• a copy of the complaint

• use of force forms where there is an allegation of excessive force or an injury

• medical records relating to any injuries allegedly sustained

• the custody record, where the referral relates to an issue that occurred

in custody

• ofﬁcer notes relating to the incident.

Voluntary referrals

8.25 The IPCC encourages appropriate authorities to refer complaints or recordable

conduct matters that do not have to be referred but where the gravity of the subject

matter or exceptional circumstances justiﬁes referral.

This may be, for example,

because the complaint or recordable conduct matter could have a signiﬁcant impact

on public conﬁdence, or it is felt there is a need for independent involvement in

the investigation.

8.26 Relevant local policing bodies can also refer complaints or recordable conduct matters

which either have not been referred or are required to be referred by the appropriate

authority if the local policing body considers referral would be appropriate because of

the gravity of the subject matter or any other exceptional circumstances.

Referral of complaints about direction and control

Where a complaint relates to a direction and control matter but is not a complaint

which must be referred to the IPCC, it may only be referred to the IPCC if the

IPCC consents.

Paragraph 4, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Paragraph 4 and 13, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002.

Section 8:

REFERRALS

49Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 158

8.27 In cases where an appropriate authority wishes to refer a complaint about a

direction and control matter it should contact the IPCC for its consent, giving as

much information about the matter as possible including why it is considered to

be a direction and control matter and the reasons why it should be referred to

the IPCC.

Notiﬁcation of referral

Whenever a local policing body or chief ofﬁcer refers a complaint or conduct matter

to the IPCC, it must notify:

• the complainant (if there is one); and

• the person complained against or whose conduct it was, unless it would

prejudice a possible future investigation of the complaint or matter.

Paragraph 4 and 13, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

The local resolution of any complaint must be discontinued if the IPCC calls

the complaint in or it is otherwise referred to the IPCC.

Paragraph 8, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Determining whether and how a matter should be investigated

Once a referral is made to the IPCC it must determine whether the matter should

be investigated. If it decides that the matter should be investigated then it must

determine the mode of investigation, having regard to the seriousness of the case

and the public interest.

Paragraph 5, 14, 14D and 15, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

8.28 It is therefore essential that as much information is given at the time of referral or

as soon as practicable thereafter to ensure the IPCC makes the right decision in

respect of the matters referred to it.

Section 8:

REFERRALS

50Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 158

When a matter does not need to be investigated

If the IPCC decides that the matter does not need to be investigated then:

• in the case of a complaint, it may refer the complaint back to the appropriate

authority for local resolution or local investigation or, if appropriate, to consider

making an application for disapplication

• in the case of a recordable conduct or DSI matter, it may refer the matter to the

appropriate authority to be dealt with in such a manner (if any) as the

appropriate authority thinks ﬁt.

Paragraph 5, 14 and 14D Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

When the IPCC determines a matter should be investigated

8.29 Having taken into account the seriousness of the case and the public interest, the

IPCC must determine the mode of investigation. The mode of investigation may be:

• local investigation;

• supervised investigation;

• managed investigation; or

• independent investigation.

The IPCC can, at any time, re-determine the mode of investigation.

Paragraph 15, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Section 8:

REFERRALS

51Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 159

Section 9:

INVESTIGATIONS

9.1 Investigations under the Police Reform Act 2002 may vary greatly in their scope,

purpose and complexity. This section covers:

• the IPCC’s expectations in relation to issues such as terms of reference and keeping

an audit trail

• some of the legislative requirements that apply to such an investigation, such as:

- special requirements and severity assessments

- the power to suspend an investigation; and

- duties with regard to the provision of information

• best practice guidance.

Purpose of an investigation

9.2 The purpose of an investigation is to establish the facts behind a complaint, conduct

matter or DSI matter and reach conclusions. This includes, where applicable, whether,

in respect of those subject to investigation, there is a case to answer for misconduct or

gross misconduct or unsatisfactory performance. It is also an opportunity to ascertain

whether there is any learning for the force arising from the incident itself or the way it

was handled. An investigation should be fair, reasonable and objective and based on

evidence. What is reasonable in each case will depend on the particular circumstances.

Appointment of a person to carry out the investigation

The appropriate authority is responsible for appointing the investigating ofﬁcer in a

local, supervised or managed investigation. In the case of a supervised or managed

investigation, the IPCC has the power to require any proposed appointment to be

subject to its approval or, where a person has already been appointed, it may require

another investigating ofﬁcer to be selected.

Paragraph 16, 17 and 18, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Section 9:

INVESTIGATIONS

52Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 159

An appropriate authority may appoint:

i. a person serving with the police

ii. a member of staff of the Serious Organised Crime Agency, or

iii. a member of staff of the National Policing Improvement Agency who is a constable

to investigate the complaint or matter.

However, the appointment of an investigating ofﬁcer is subject to a number of

important qualiﬁcations. These are:

i. where an investigation relates to the conduct of a chief ofﬁcer, the investigating

ofﬁcer must not be under that chief ofﬁcer’s direction and control

ii. where an investigation relates to the conduct of the Commissioner or Deputy

Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis, the investigating ofﬁcer must be

nominated by the Secretary of State for the Home Department

iii. the investigating ofﬁcer must have an appropriate level of knowledge, skills

and experience to plan and manage the investigation

iv. the investigating ofﬁcer must not work, directly or indirectly, under the

management of the person being investigated (this qualiﬁcation does not apply

to the investigation of a complaint about a direction and control matter)

v. where an investigation relates to a senior ofﬁcer, the investigating ofﬁcer must

not be the chief ofﬁcer or a member of the same force as the person to whose

conduct the investigation relates (this qualification does not apply to the

investigation of a complaint about a direction and control matter); and

vi. the investigating ofﬁcer must not be appointed if his involvement in that role

could reasonably give rise to a concern whether he or she could act impartially

(however, where an investigation relates to a complaint about a direction and

control matter the fact that a person works, directly or indirectly, under the

management of the person to whose conduct the investigation relates or is the

chief ofﬁcer or a member of the same force as the person to whose conduct the

investigation relates are not enough in themselves to constitute reasonable

grounds for concern that the investigating ofﬁcer could not act impartially).

Paragraph 16, 17 and 18, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Regulation 24, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

9.3 The appointment of an investigator should be recorded in writing. Where any

concerns have been raised about the appointment of a particular investigator the

appropriate authority should also record in writing any decision, together with its

reasons, whether or not to replace the investigator.

9.4 At the start of each investigation, the investigator should make a written note

in the investigation decision log to declare whether or not there is anything that

could reasonably give rise to a concern about whether he or she or any member

of the investigation team could act impartially.

Section 9:

INVESTIGATIONS

53Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 159

9.5 If no such concern is identiﬁed, an entry in the investigation decision log should be

made to that effect for the purposes of transparency. Where there is such concern

the investigator should raise it with the appropriate authority (and the IPCC in a

managed or supervised investigation), before he or she or any member of the

investigation team carries out any steps (other than preservation of evidence)

in connection with the investigation.

9.6 The appropriate authority should then decide whether to replace the investigator

or not. Any decision made, together with the reasons, should be recorded in

writing. This decision will be subject to any power of the IPCC to require the

appropriate authority to select another investigator.

Terms of reference

9.7 Terms of reference will vary according to the complexity of an investigation. In

straightforward investigations which are not subject to special requirements they

may be as simple as a summary of the complaint being investigated. Investigations

supervised or managed by the IPCC, as well as those which it carries out

independently, will always have more detailed terms of reference.

9.8 Terms of reference should:

• provide focus and direction for the investigation

• be clear, unambiguous and tightly drawn

• describe the scope of the investigation that will be undertaken including the

time period and/or what will not be investigated, if appropriate

• include a summary of any concerns, complaints or allegations

• not list actions to be undertaken

• include the identiﬁcation of organisational learning

• spell out, where there is a parallel investigation, the relationship between

the two investigations.

9.9 Subject to the harm test, a copy of the terms of reference and any revisions to

them should be sent to complainants, interested persons and any subjects of

the investigation. It may also be useful to meet with the complainant and any

interested person at an early stage to explain the investigation process.

Keeping an audit trail

9.10 Every investigation, no matter how small or quick, requires some level of ﬁle

recording to show what was done and why, together with the collation and

preservation of any documents or other evidence seen or created as part of

the inquiry.

Section 9:

INVESTIGATIONS

54Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 159

9.11 The investigator should be able to demonstrate that steps were taken to

understand the complaint and the views of the complainant. The following

are examples of steps that may be taken to achieve this:

• if the investigation is based on a letter, the investigator should check with the

complainant that this is a full account of everything that the person wants to

complain about;

• if the complainant has expressed a wish to make a statement then the

investigator should not refuse this and, whilst it may not always be necessary,

ordinarily a formal statement should be taken. If a statement is not taken, the

basis for this decision should be recorded by the investigator; and

• if the complaint has been made verbally, this must be recorded in writing and

a copy of the account provided to the complainant at an early stage. This gives

the complainant an opportunity to conﬁrm his or her agreement that it is an

accurate record of the complaint he or she wants addressed.

9.12 A statement must always be sought from the complainant if his or her evidence

may be used in criminal proceedings or disciplinary proceedings.

9.13 Where the investigator seeks an account from a person who is the subject of

investigation, there must be an auditable record of it. The person could be invited to sign

handwritten notes or a pocket notebook entry to conﬁrm the accuracy of a record of a

conversation. However, this is the minimum. In many cases, more would be required,

such as an account by email, letter, statement or (recorded) interview. If an investigation

is subject to special requirements (see paragraphs 9.29 to 9.34) or is an investigation into

a recordable conduct matter, a notice of investigation will in most cases have been

served (see paragraph 9.39) and a statement under an appropriate caution should be

taken or requested from the person to whose conduct the investigation relates or he or

she should be required to attend an interview, which will be recorded (see paragraphs

9.41 to 9.47 for more information on interviews).

The scope of the investigation

9.14 Investigators should adopt a proportionate approach to any investigation in order

to ensure that, in the public interest, investigative resources are focused and

employed efficiently and fairly. However, to use the term ‘proportionate’ is not

another way of describing an investigation as limited or small scale. It must be

borne in mind that the adequacy of the investigation may be scrutinised when any

appeal is considered either by the IPCC or the chief ofﬁcer. In order to decide what is

a proportionate approach to investigating a complaint it may be useful to discuss

with the complainant what are his or her key points to ensure that these are

covered. Every investigation needs to be proportionate to:

• the seriousness of the matter being investigated;

• the prospects of a criminal trial, misconduct proceedings or unsatisfactory

performance proceedings resulting;

• the public interest; and

• the investigation producing learning for the individual or organisation.

Section 9:

INVESTIGATIONS

55Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 159

9.15 Investigators should take the following factors into account when determining the

scope of an investigation and the methods to be used:

• the need to establish the facts in all cases;

• the seriousness of the allegation;

• whether Articles 2 or 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights

are engaged;

• any more general cause of a complainant’s dissatisfaction;

• whether the facts are in dispute;

• how long ago the incident took place and whether evidence is still likely

to be available;

• the learning the investigation might yield for local or national policing

and individual learning for persons serving with the police; and

• actual or potential public knowledge of, and concern about, the case.

9.16 Where further investigation is no longer proportionate to the likely outcome (for

example, because no additional evidence is likely to emerge) it should be concluded and

ﬁndings reported to the appropriate authority (or the IPCC in independent, managed or

supervised investigations). In local and supervised investigations into a complaint the

complainant has a right of appeal in relation to the investigation.

Allegations involving discrimination

9.17 Allegations of discrimination are not inevitably at the most serious end of the

spectrum: all allegations must be assessed individually. Judgements made at the

start of the investigation may well change in the light of the evidence. An allegation

of discrimination could be more serious if, for example, the allegation has become

the focus of public concern, or the incident may demonstrate that an officer’s

subsequent decision making may have been inﬂuenced by discriminatory attitudes.

9.18 The following factors can provide a guide to the scope of the investigation and

the methods to be used (see also information on getting a complaint statement

at paragraph 3.30). These factors should be revisited and re-assessed as more

information becomes available. The list is not intended to be deﬁnitive or prescriptive:

• does the alleged discriminatory behaviour involve words, attitude or actions?

• what was the impact of the alleged behaviour on the complainant or

interested person?

• what is the nature of the evidence supporting the alleged behaviour and what

other evidence is likely to be found in establishing what happened during

the incident?

• was the alleged behaviour raised by the complainant, someone on his or her

behalf or an interested person, or reported by another person serving with

the police?

Section 9:

INVESTIGATIONS

56Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 159

• what does the complainant or interested person expect as an outcome for

dealing with the alleged discrimination?

• has the impact of the incident affected, or is it likely that the impact will

affect, the wider community or have a negative impact on views about the

police service?

• is anything relevant known about the person to whose conduct the

investigation relates, police force or local police area that would impact

on the degree of investigation required?

• does the allegation raise other issues that will impact on how it is dealt with?

9.19 Evidence that could be considered in investigating an allegation of discriminatory

behaviour might include:

• whether intelligence reports exist about the person subject to investigation or

whether there is anything recorded on his or her personal ﬁles. However, any

reference to personal data must be justiﬁable and lawful as there could be data

protection issues.

• covert methods of gaining evidence (telephone logs, surveillance, integrity

testing) may be considered if lawful in the circumstances

• if broader allegations of discrimination are indicated, it may be appropriate to

extend considerations to a particular division or area in the police force. This

may include consideration of local or national policies either in relation to a

particular area or more generally on a community relations level.

9.20 It may also be useful to consider comparator evidence such as:

• how any other persons serving with the police who were present behaved

at the incident;

• how other members of the public were treated at the same incident;

• how this ofﬁcer or police staff member has behaved in similar circumstances;

• how this complainant or interested person has been treated at other

similar incidents

• how a reasonable person serving with the police with similar levels of training

and experience would be expected to behave in these circumstances.

9.21 When assessing all of the evidence it is important to give appropriate weight to any

explanation given by a person serving with the police in response to the allegation

of discrimination, particularly where there is a difference in treatment which has

resulted in detriment to the complainant. There may have been an obvious detriment,

such as loss of liberty. However, detriment can also include loss of dignity and hurt

feelings. An investigator will have to make an assessment about whether the

explanation provided is adequate, reasonable and justiﬁed in the circumstances. The

allegation will be difﬁcult to assess where the person subject of investigation has

provided no explanation for the alleged behaviour. Comparator evidence, in these

circumstances, may be helpful to the investigator as a means of determining whether

discrimination was a factor.

Section 9:

INVESTIGATIONS

57Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 159

9.22 Discrimination is not always overt, and it can be necessary to look at all the

circumstances of a particular case in order to see if discrimination can rightly

be inferred from the surrounding facts as explained at paragraph 3.29 above.

9.23 The relationship between the police and people from minority groups may be

affected by local circumstances. Investigators should aim to ensure they have

an awareness of local issues and experiences.

Death or serious injury matters turning into conduct matters

9.24 If, during an investigation of a DSI matter, it appears to the investigator that there is

an indication that a person serving with the police may have committed a criminal

offence or behaved in a manner justifying disciplinary proceedings, the investigator

must make a submission to that effect. This should be in writing and should set out

the investigator’s reasons for reaching this conclusion.

9.25 In a managed investigation, the submission must be sent to the IPCC. In a local or

supervised investigation the submission must be sent to the appropriate authority.

9.26 In a managed investigation, if the IPCC Commissioner agrees that there is such an

indication he or she will send a copy of the submission to the appropriate authority who

must record the matter as a conduct matter and consider whether it should be referred

to the IPCC. In a local or supervised investigation if the appropriate authority agrees with

the submission, it must notify the relevant appropriate authority, (if it is not the relevant

authority itself) and the IPCC and send them a copy of the investigator’s submission. The

relevant appropriate authority must then record the matter as a conduct matter and

consider whether it should be referred to the IPCC. In any case, the IPCC may call the

matter in and may re-determine the mode of investigation.

9.27 Once the matter has been recorded, the investigator must make a severity assessment

in relation to the conduct of the person concerned (where that person is a member of

a police force or a special constable).

9.28 This process may happen at any time during an investigation and any DSI investigation

should be kept under review as to whether there is an indication of the matters set out

in paragraph 9.24.

Special requirements

9.29 Special requirements only apply to investigations of complaints against a member of

a police force or a special constable. In the case of any other person, the investigator

must adhere to the relevant policies and procedures for investigating allegations

made against such persons.

Section 9:

INVESTIGATIONS

58Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 159

If at any time during an investigation of a complaint, it appears to the investigator

that there is an indication that a person to whose conduct the investigation relates

may have:

• committed a criminal offence; or

• behaved in a manner which would justify the bringing of disciplinary proceedings

then the investigator must certify the investigation as one subject to special

requirements.

Paragraph 19B, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

9.30 This provision means that throughout the course of any investigation, the investigator

must consider whether such an indication exists even if he or she initially decided it

did not.

9.31 Disciplinary proceedings for the purposes of special requirements mean any

proceedings under the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2012.

9.32 There is an ‘indication’ where the investigator, having considered the circumstances

and evidence available at that time, is of the view that the ofﬁcer, or member of staff,

may have committed a criminal offence or behaved in a manner justifying the bringing

of disciplinary proceedings. A bare assertion of misconduct or criminality, particularly

if it is undermined by other material or inherently unlikely, may not be sufﬁcient. For

example a complaint that an ofﬁcer is “harassing” someone without more is unlikely

to be sufﬁcient.

9.33 The investigator must set out the reasoning behind his or her decision as to

whether an investigation should be subject to special requirements.

9.34 In a managed investigation, the investigator must consult with the IPCC’s

managing investigator as to whether or not the investigation should be subject

to special requirements.

Severity assessments

9.35 Severity assessments only apply to investigations of complaints subject to special

requirements or recordable conduct matters against a member of a police force or

a special constable. Again, in the case of any other person, the investigator must

adhere to the relevant policies and procedures for investigating allegations against

such persons.

Section 9:

INVESTIGATIONS

59Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 159

Severity assessments must be undertaken in respect of investigations of complaints

subject to special requirements and all recordable conduct matters against a

member of a police force or a special constable.

A severity assessment must be made as soon as reasonably practicable after:

• the investigator certiﬁes the investigation as one subject to special requirements,

in the case of a complaint; or

• the investigator is appointed in the case of a recordable conduct matter; or

• a matter is recorded as a conduct matter during or following an investigation

of a DSI matter.

A severity assessment is an assessment as to:

• whether the conduct, if proved, would amount to misconduct or gross

misconduct; and

• if the conduct were to become the subject of disciplinary proceedings, the

form which those proceedings would be likely to take.

Paragraph 19B, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

9.36 The investigator must make the severity assessment on the basis of what would

happen if the conduct was proved. The investigator should not consider the

likelihood of the conduct being proven when making the severity assessment.

9.37 The investigator must consult with the appropriate authority before the

assessment is completed.

In a managed investigation, the investigator should

also consult with the IPCC’s managing investigator.

9.38 Any assessment must be fully reasoned and documented. The investigator should

obtain a copy of the relevant ofﬁcer’s disciplinary history to ensure that the

appropriate assessment is made (see paragraph 9.40).

9.39 After deciding whether the conduct, if proved, would amount to misconduct or

gross misconduct, the investigator must decide what form any disciplinary

proceedings would be likely to take.

Section 9:

INVESTIGATIONS

Paragraph 19B, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

The deﬁnitions of misconduct and gross misconduct are as follows:

Misconduct is deﬁned as:

a breach of the Standards of Professional Behaviour

Gross misconduct is deﬁned as:

a breach of the Standards of Professional Behaviour so serious that dismissal would

be justiﬁed

Paragraph 29, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002 and Regulation 3, Police (Conduct) Regulations 2012

60Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 159

9.40 Ordinarily an assessment of misconduct would result in a misconduct meeting

and an assessment of gross misconduct would result in a hearing. However, checks

on the ofﬁcer’s disciplinary record should be made to determine whether:

• they are the subject of a live ﬁnal written warning at the time of the initial

severity assessment, or

• they have been reduced in rank (under the Police (Conduct) Regulations

2004 only) less than 18 months prior to the initial severity assessment.

9.41 If either condition applies, then the proceedings will be a hearing (irrespective

of whether the conduct was assessed as amounting to misconduct only).

9.42 The severity assessment may be revised if the investigator believes it is appropriate

to do so.

Notices of investigation

On completing a severity assessment, the investigator must give a written notice to

the person concerned, which complies with the requirements of paragraph 19B(7),

Schedule 3 of the Police Reform Act 2002 and regulation 16 of the Police

(Complaints & Misconduct) Regulations 2012.

A written notice need not be given for so long as the investigator considers the

notiﬁcation might prejudice:

• the investigation; or

• any other investigation, including a criminal investigation.

During an investigation, the investigator may revise the severity assessment and if

they do so they must, as soon as practicable, serve a further written notice on the

person concerned which complies with Paragraph 19B(7), Schedule 3 of the Police

Reform Act 2002 and regulation 16 of the Police (Complaints & Misconduct)

Regulations 2012.

Paragraph 19B, Schedule 3 Police Reform Act 2002

9.43 In a managed investigation, the investigator should consult with the IPCC’s

managing investigator as to the content of the notice, whether its service should

be delayed or any revision of the severity assessment.

Representations to the investigator

During the investigation of a complaint subject to special requirements or a recordable

conduct matter, the investigator must consider any relevant statement or document

provided by the person concerned (or document provided by a police friend) within ten

working days (unless this period has been extended by the investigator) starting with

the day after which the notice of investigation is given.

Paragraph 19C, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Regulation 18, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

Section 9:

INVESTIGATIONS

Regulation 19(9)(a) and (b), Police (Conduct) Regulations 2012

61Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 159

9.44 Any oral statement should be recorded and the person concerned should be asked

to sign the record as an accurate reﬂection of what has been said.

Interviews

During an investigation which is subject to special requirements or in relation to

a recordable conduct matter and where an investigator proposes to interview the

person concerned (the interviewee), the investigator shall, if reasonably practicable,

agree a date and time for the interview with the interviewee.

If a date and time is not agreed, the investigator shall specify a date and time. If the

interviewee or their police friend is not available to attend but proposes an alternative

time which is reasonable and falls within ﬁve working days beginning with the ﬁrst

working day after the day speciﬁed by the investigator, then the interview will be

postponed to the time proposed. An interviewee must attend the interview.

Regulation 19, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

9.45 A failure to attend an interview may in itself be a breach of the Standards

of Professional Behaviour.

9.46 The interviewee must be given written notice of the date, time and place of

interview.

This should be given as soon as reasonably practicable after these are

either agreed or, in the absence of agreement, speciﬁed by the investigator.

In advance of an interview, the investigator must provide the interviewee with such

information as the investigator considers appropriate in the circumstances of the

case to enable the interviewee to prepare for the interview.

Regulation 19, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

9.47 Decisions as to what should be disclosed should be documented and made in light

of the circumstances of the case. The interviewee is not entitled to disclosure of

every document, but only those that the investigator considers appropriate in the

circumstances of the case to enable them to prepare for interview.

Public conﬁdence

could be undermined if the extent of the disclosure given could be perceived to give

the interviewee an unfair advantage.

9.48 Where a decision is made to interview a person serving with the police and if the

allegation is at the more serious end of the spectrum, then consideration should be

given to techniques such as video interviewing, cognitive interviewing and interviewing

vulnerable and signiﬁcant witnesses. Only investigators who have received the appropriate

training should undertake such interviews.

9.49 At the beginning of the interview the interviewee should be reminded of the

content of any written notice of investigation given to him or her and reminded

of the warnings it contains.

Section 9:

INVESTIGATIONS

Regulation 19, Police (Complaints & Misconduct) Regulations 2012

Regulation 19, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

62Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 159

9.50 Where an interview is taking place in relation to an allegation of discriminatory

behaviour the person being interviewed should be invited to:

• describe in detail what took place;

• describe his or her perceptions of the complainant and the incident;

• reﬂect on what may have prompted the complaint;

• reﬂect on his or her behaviour in the light of the relevant

professional standards;

• describe his or her training and experience;

• reﬂect on his or her understanding of his or her public duties to eliminate

discrimination and promote equality;

• reﬂect on the interaction with the complainant in light of the allegation.

9.51 These provisions apply to interviews held under the Police Reform Act 2002.

Criminal interviews held under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984

must comply with that Act and the relevant case law and codes of practice.

Power to suspend an investigation or other procedure

An appropriate authority may suspend an investigation or other procedure which

would, if it were to continue, prejudice any criminal investigation or proceedings.

Having consulted with the appropriate authority, the IPCC may direct that the

investigation or procedure shall continue if it is in the public interest.

Regulation 22, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

9.52 The power to suspend only arises where continuing the investigation or other

procedure would prejudice a criminal investigation or criminal proceedings.

Thus, there should be speciﬁc, identiﬁed prejudice (and that prejudice should

be signiﬁcant). In order to determine whether such prejudice arises, it will be

necessary to consider the following:

(a) the extent to which the matter raises issues which are the same as, or closely

connected with, the issues in the ongoing criminal investigation or

proceedings; and

(b) what particular prejudice (if any) would be caused to the ongoing criminal

investigation or proceedings by the investigation or any other procedure.

Section 9:

INVESTIGATIONS

63Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 159

9.53 If the power to suspend arises, appropriate authorities should next consider whether

it is appropriate to exercise that power in all the circumstances. When deciding

whether to exercise the power to suspend, authorities should consider whether, if the

investigation or other procedure were to continue, there would be prejudice to the

criminal investigation or proceedings which is so signiﬁcant that it is not outweighed

by the public interest in ensuring:

i. the prompt investigation of the matter; and

ii. the prompt bringing of criminal or disciplinary proceedings against persons

serving with the police where they are warranted.

9.54 In other words, a balancing exercise should be carried out. The following relevant

factors should be considered:

• the relative severity of the allegation against the person serving with the

police and the allegation against the suspect or defendant in the criminal

investigation or proceedings;

• the relative strength of the evidence in support of each allegation;

• whether delay would lead to the frustration of any potential criminal

or disciplinary proceedings against a person serving with the police;

• in particular, whether suspending the investigation would risk the expiration

of the six-month statutory time limit for the bringing of a prosecution of a

summary-only offence before the conclusion of any investigation;

• whether delay would otherwise lead to injustice to the complainant, interested

person or to the subject of the complaint; and

• the view of the CPS about whether continuing with the investigation or other

procedure would prejudice any criminal investigation or proceedings, and if

so, whether there are any steps short of suspension which can be taken to

mitigate the risk of prejudice.

9.55 There will be many cases where the necessary balancing exercise comes down in

favour of continuing with the investigation or other procedure even though the issues

raised by the criminal investigation or proceedings and by the complaint are closely

linked. That might be so, for example, where it is alleged that the police ofﬁcer has

committed a more serious offence than that with which the defendant to the related

criminal proceedings is charged (because it might then be in the public interest to

prioritise the investigation and prosecution of the more serious offence despite the

risk of prejudice to the ongoing prosecution of the lesser offence).

9.56 Appropriate authorities should always seek, and consider, the views of the CPS

before exercising the power to suspend.

9.57 A number of steps may be taken to reduce (or remove) the risk of prejudice to

criminal proceedings while still allowing an investigation to proceed. These include,

• carrying out a single interview with each relevant witness covering both the

subject matter of the criminal proceedings and the matter under investigation;

• interviewing witnesses to the matter in the presence of the solicitor for the

defendant to the criminal proceedings.

Section 9:

INVESTIGATIONS

64Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 159

9.58 Appropriate authorities should always consider whether measures of this kind can

be put in place, and should only exercise the power to suspend where signiﬁcant

prejudice to the criminal proceedings, which is not outweighed by countervailing

public interest considerations, would remain even if any appropriate measures of

this type were taken.

9.59 Even though an investigation or other procedure is suspended, there may still be an

opportunity to obtain witness statements by those not involved in a criminal investigation

or trial. There is also unlikely to be any reason why, if the criteria are satisﬁed, the relevant

persons cannot or should not be served with a notice of investigation. Furthermore, it may

well be the case that after receiving legal advice, the complainant decides that they still

wish to provide a statement of complaint. Other aspects of the investigation may still be

subject to suspension if the appropriate authority, in consultation with the CPS, deems

this appropriate.

9.60 In any instance where an investigation or other procedure is suspended, the

complainant must be notiﬁed in writing and be provided with a rationale for the

decision. Where a complainant objects to the suspension, he or she should also be

informed of their right to ask the IPCC to consider whether or not to direct that the

investigation or other procedure continue.

Resumption of a complaint after criminal proceedings

Where the whole or part of a local or supervised investigation of a complaint has been

suspended until the conclusion of criminal proceedings, unless the complainant has

indicated that he or she wishes for the investigation to start or be resumed, the

appropriate authority must take all reasonable steps to contact the complainant (or if

applicable, their solicitor or other representative), to ascertain whether the investigation

should be started or resumed. In a managed or independent investigation this will be the

responsibility of the IPCC.

The investigation must be started or resumed if the complainant indicates he or she

does want this.

If the complainant indicates he or she does not want the investigation started or

resumed or fails to reply within 28 days starting on the day after the date of the

letter sent to him or her, then the appropriate authority must determine whether

it is in the public interest for the complaint to be treated as a recordable

conduct matter.

Regulation 23, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

9.61 If the appropriate authority decides it is in the public interest for the complaint to be

treated as a recordable conduct matter then it should be dealt with as a recordable

conduct matter. If it decides it is not in the public interest, the appropriate authority

can close the case and should notify the complainant to that effect. The appropriate

authority must also notify the person complained against whether it will treat the

matter as a recordable conduct matter or not, unless it might prejudice any criminal

investigation, pending proceedings or would not be in the public interest.

Section 9:

INVESTIGATIONS

65Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 159

9.62 The IPCC expects the appropriate authority to have checked whether the

complainant is in prison as this may have a bearing on the speed, practicality

and means of communication, and any delay may not be due to an unwillingness

to co-operate.

9.63 Where a complaint is subject to a supervised investigation, the investigator should

write to the IPCC staff member supervising, setting out the action taken to contact

the complainant before proposing to close the case. This enables the IPCC to decide if

further action needs to be taken before the complaint is closed. This would be dealt

with as a ‘reasonable requirement’ for the purposes of the supervised investigation.

Suspension of ofﬁcers and special constables

The Police (Conduct) Regulations 2012 allow the appropriate authority to suspend

a police ofﬁcer or special constable in certain circumstances.

In the case of a supervised, managed or independent investigation the appropriate

authority must consult with the IPCC in deciding whether or not to suspend an

ofﬁcer or special constable. It must also consult the IPCC before a suspension is

brought to an end (because the suspension conditions are no longer satisﬁed).

Regulation 10, Police (Conduct) Regulations 2012

9.64 In consulting the IPCC, the appropriate authority should inform the IPCC of its

preliminary view and rationale for that view, including which suspension

conditions are satisﬁed.

Providing information/communication

9.65 Investigators and appropriate authorities need to manage the provision of information

to complainants, interested persons and those to whose conduct the investigation

relates in the course of an investigation. They also need to be in a position to deal with

requests for information and questions.

Section 9:

INVESTIGATIONS

Regulation 9, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

66Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 159

The Police Reform Act 2002 requires the appropriate authority (or the IPCC in

independent and managed cases) to keep the complainant and/or interested

person informed about:

• the progress of an investigation

• any provisional ﬁndings of the person carrying out the investigation

• where applicable whether the appropriate authority (or the IPCC) has made a

determination under paragraph 21A, Schedule 3 of the Police Reform Act 2002

• whether an investigation report has been submitted to the IPCC or the

appropriate authority

• the action to be taken (if any); and

• where action is taken, its outcome(s).

Sections 20 and 21, Police Reform Act 2002

9.66 Once an investigation has started, the appropriate authority in a local or supervised

investigation, or the IPCC in an independent or managed investigation, has a duty

to keep the complainant or interested person informed of its progress.

The ﬁrst update must be provided promptly and within 28 calendar days of the start

of the investigation. Subsequent updates must be provided at least every 28 calendar

days after that.

Regulation 12, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

9.67 The investigator should agree with the complainant or interested person how he or

she wishes to be kept informed of the progress of the investigation (i.e. by telephone,

in writing, or in person). Where a notiﬁcation is given that is not in writing, it must be

conﬁrmed in writing as soon as reasonably practicable.

9.68 Updates on the progress of the investigation may include, for example, information

about the stage reached in the investigation, what has been done, what remains to

be done and, where applicable, a summary of any signiﬁcant evidence obtained.

Updates should also include the likely timescale for completing the investigation

and any revisions to this.

9.69 It is also good practice, where it will not prejudice the investigation, to keep the person

who is the subject of the investigation regularly informed of the investigation’s progress,

taking into account the exceptions described below. At the start of the investigation, an

investigator should agree with him or her or his or her representative(s), the preferred

method for giving the updates and to whom they should be given.

9.70 Appropriate authorities and investigators should take into account any further

guidance issued by the IPCC concerning disclosure of information.

Section 9:

INVESTIGATIONS

67Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 159

Exceptions to the duty to provide information

The duty to keep the complainant and interested persons informed does not apply

in circumstances where non-disclosure is:

i. necessary to prevent premature or inappropriate disclosure of information that

is relevant to, or may be used in, any actual or prospective criminal proceedings

ii. necessary to prevent the disclosure of information in any circumstances in which

its non-disclosure is:

• in the interest of national security

• for the purposes of the prevention or detection of crime, or the

apprehension or prosecution of offenders

• required on proportionality grounds; or

• otherwise necessary in the public interest.

The appropriate authority must consider whether the non-disclosure of information

is justiﬁed under any of the above grounds where:

i. that information is relevant to, or may be used in, any actual or prospective

disciplinary proceedings

ii. the disclosure of that information may lead to the contamination of the evidence

of witnesses during such proceedings

iii. the disclosure of that information may prejudice the welfare or safety of any

third party

iv. that information constitutes criminal intelligence.

Regulation 13, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

9.71 Information must not be withheld on one of these grounds unless the appropriate

authority concludes that there is a real risk of the disclosure of the information causing

a signiﬁcant adverse effect.

In considering whether provision of information may have a

signiﬁcant adverse effect, it is necessary to bear in mind that the risk may not be explicit

on the face of one document, but may be implicit when several documents are taken

together. For example, an informant may not be explicitly named, but it may be possible

to identify him or her from the context when several documents are considered together.

9.72 Potential harm can sometimes be avoided or minimised by redacting the material

that is harmful from the document or information requested. What needs to be

removed will depend on what information is requested and what harm may arise

from its disclosure.

Section 9:

INVESTIGATIONS

Regulation 13, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

68Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 1510

Section 10:

DISCONTINUANCES

10.1 A discontinuance ends an ongoing investigation into a complaint, conduct matter

or DSI matter. It can take place only in certain limited circumstances set out in the

Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012 and described in paragraphs

10.5 to 10.15 below. Appropriate authorities must satisfy themselves that one of

the grounds applies before discontinuing an investigation or applying to discontinue.

When can an investigation be discontinued by the appropriate authority?

The appropriate authority may discontinue a local investigation into a complaint

which did not require to be referred to the IPCC or a local investigation into a

conduct or DSI matter.

Paragraph 21, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

When the IPCC’s permission needs to be obtained

The appropriate authority must obtain the IPCC’s permission to discontinue an

investigation if:

• the investigation it wishes to discontinue is a local investigation into a complaint

which required referral to the IPCC; or

• the investigation it wishes to discontinue is being carried out under the

supervision or management of the IPCC.

Paragraph 21, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

10.2 The IPCC may decide, in the absence of an application from the appropriate authority,

that an investigation should be discontinued (provided that discontinuance is within

its power). It may also discontinue an independent investigation.

10.3 While an appropriate authority may make an application to the IPCC for permission

to discontinue an investigation more than once on the same investigation, a second

application should be made only where there is new evidence or information to

support the later application which was not available at the time the ﬁrst

application was made.

Section 10:

DISCONTINUANCES

69Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 1510

Information to be sent to the IPCC

Any application by an appropriate authority to the IPCC for permission to

discontinue an investigation shall be in writing and shall be accompanied by a copy

of the complaint and a memorandum from the appropriate authority containing a

summary of the investigation undertaken so far and explaining the reasons for the

application to discontinue.

Regulation 10, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

Section 10:

DISCONTINUANCES

Outgoing local, supervised or

managed investigation

The appropriate authority may

decide whether to discontinue

the investigation

The complainant has a right

of appeal against a decision

to discontinue

Does the investigation

fit any of the grounds

for discontinuance?

Continue the

investigation

The appropriate

authority must

apply to the IPCC

for permission

to discontinue

There is no right

of appeal against

discontinuance

Yes

Is the investigation

into a complaint which

required referral to

the IPCC?

Is the investigation

being supervised

or managed by

the IPCC?

70Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 1510

Requirement to obtain representations from the complainant

Before discontinuing an investigation or applying to the IPCC for permission to

discontinue, the appropriate authority must write to the complainant at his or her

last known address inviting him or her to make representations. The letter must

state that the complainant has 28 days from the day after the date of the letter to

make any representations. Any representations which are made must be taken into

account before a ﬁnal decision to discontinue or make an application to the IPCC is

made as they may affect the appropriate authority’s decision.

Regulation 10, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

10.4 The appropriate authority should make reasonable efforts to contact the

complainant in order to seek his or her representations.

Grounds for discontinuance

The complainant refuses to co-operate to the extent that it is not reasonably

practicable to continue the investigation

10.5 Before deciding to discontinue an investigation or applying to the IPCC for

permission to discontinue, the appropriate authority must consider whether it is

reasonably practicable to continue and conclude the investigation, irrespective of

the lack of co-operation from the complainant. If possible, the investigation should

be concluded and the complainant advised of the investigation ﬁndings, proposed

action and right of appeal (if applicable).

10.6 Before deciding that this ground applies, the appropriate authority should

ensure that:

• reasonable efforts have been made to contact the complainant (i.e. more than

one attempt) and to gain their co-operation, using a range of methods, for

example, by letter, email or telephone;

• efforts have been made to work through the complainant’s representative

(where applicable);

• practical help has been made available to support a complainant with

speciﬁc needs.

10.7 Where a complainant has provided a statement or a letter of complaint, this ground

is unlikely to be appropriate except where further information is necessary to continue

the investigation and the complainant refuses to co-operate. The appropriate authority

should consider whether, in light of the information already provided, the complainant’s

refusal to co-operate means that it is not reasonably practicable to complete

the investigation.

Section 10:

DISCONTINUANCES

71Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 1510

Where the appropriate authority has determined the complaint is suitable for

local resolution

10.8 In order to meet this ground, the complaint should pass the suitability test for local

resolution set out in paragraphs 5.10 to 5.12. Before making a decision to discontinue

an investigation on this ground, or applying to the IPCC for permission to discontinue,

the appropriate authority should speak to the complainant about the local resolution

process and ascertain his or her views on the complaint being dealt with in that

way. This could be done as part of the process of gaining representations or more

informally before making a decision whether to discontinue or applying to the IPCC.

10.9 If the complaint is one that was referred to the IPCC and a mode of investigation

has been determined, the IPCC’s approval is needed before a determination can

be reached that the complaint is suitable for local resolution. In such cases an

application for local resolution and application for discontinuance may be

submitted as a combined application to the IPCC.

The complaint or matter is vexatious, oppressive or otherwise an abuse of procedures

for dealing with complaints, conduct matters or DSI matters

10.10 It is important to note that it is the complaint itself that must be judged vexatious,

oppressive or an abuse, not the complainant. Consideration of this ground should

therefore focus primarily on the current complaint. The complainant’s past complaint

history may, however, be included where it is relevant to show that the current

complaint is vexatious, oppressive or an abuse. The complaint history may be relevant,

for example, to show whether there have been a series of similar complaints that

have been addressed, either directed at the person subject to this complaint or

another person.

10.11 The investigation may have provided evidence to show that the complaint is

vexatious, oppressive or amounts to an abuse that could be used to support

a decision to discontinue an investigation, or to apply to the IPCC to do so.

10.12 The appropriate authority should be able to demonstrate with evidence a

reasonable belief that the complaint is vexatious, oppressive or an abuse of

process before deciding to discontinue or making an application to the IPCC.

The complaint or conduct matter is repetitious

10.13 Any representations from the complainant may explain whether or how the new

complaint differs from the original complaint.

It is not reasonably practicable to proceed with the investigation

10.14 This ground offers discretion for the appropriate authority to consider why

it is not reasonably practicable to proceed with the investigation.

10.15 The evidence supporting such an application or decision on this ground must

be sufﬁcient to demonstrate that the investigation is no longer reasonably

practicable to continue.

Section 10:

DISCONTINUANCES

72Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 1510

Notiﬁcation

When an application is made to the IPCC for permission to discontinue an investigation,

the appropriate authority must send a copy of the application to the complainant on

the same day it is sent to the IPCC.

Regulation 10, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

When the IPCC decides that an investigation should be discontinued, it must

notify the appropriate authority, the complainant (where applicable) and any

interested persons.

Where the appropriate authority discontinues an investigation itself where it is not

necessary to apply to the IPCC, it must notify the complainant (where applicable)

and any interested persons. Where the discontinuance relates to a complaint

investigation, the appropriate authority must also advise the complainant of any

right of appeal against the decision to discontinue.

Paragraph 21, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Action to be taken following a discontinuance

Where the IPCC has given the appropriate authority permission to discontinue an

investigation, the IPCC may issue the following directions to the appropriate authority:

• require the appropriate authority to produce an investigation report and to take

any subsequent steps under Schedule 3 of the Police Reform Act 2002;

• where the investigation concerned a complaint, require the appropriate authority

to disapply the requirements of Schedule 3 of the Police Reform Act 2002;

• where the investigation concerned a complaint which the appropriate authority

determined was suitable for local resolution, require the appropriate authority to

resolve locally the complaint; or

• direct the appropriate authority to handle the matter in whatever manner (if any)

that authority thinks ﬁt.

Regulation 10, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

Section 10:

DISCONTINUANCES

73Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 1510

10.16 The appropriate authority must comply with any direction given.

Where the appropriate authority discontinues an investigation without the

involvement of the IPCC, the appropriate authority may:

• produce an investigation report on the discontinued investigation and take any

subsequent steps under Schedule 3 of the Police Reform Act 2002

• where the investigation concerned a complaint, disapply the requirements

of Schedule 3 of the Police Reform Act 2002 in relation to that complaint

• locally resolve the complaint

• handle the matter in whatever manner the appropriate authority thinks ﬁt.

Regulation 10, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

10.17 Other than complying with any directions given by the IPCC or carrying out any of

the actions listed in the box above, the appropriate authority should not take any

further action under Schedule 3 of the Police Reform Act 2002 in relation to the

complaint or matter.

Appeal against the decision to discontinue

10.18 The complainant has a right of appeal against any decision by the appropriate

authority to discontinue an investigation into a complaint (except where the complaint

relates to a direction and control matter or where the IPCC’s permission is needed to

discontinue the investigation). See paragraphs 13.68 to 13.79 for information about

appeals against the decision to discontinue.

Section 10:

DISCONTINUANCES

74Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 1511

Section 11:

CONCLUDING THE

INVESTIGATION

11.1 This section deals with the investigation report. It covers:

• what the report should contain

• how the report should be written

• the action that an appropriate authority should take once a report

has been received.

The investigation report

11.2 The investigation report is an important document as it is the primary record of the

investigation, the evidence and its conclusions. Subject to the harm test it will usually

be sent to the complainant and any interested persons and so needs to be written in

clear and unambiguous terms. It may be subject to extensive scrutiny possibly even by

a court so it is important that it is factually correct and that the conclusions which are

drawn are coherent and based on the evidence gathered in the course of the investigation.

Whose report?

11.3 In a local or supervised investigation, the report is written by the investigator

appointed by the appropriate authority. The ﬁndings and conclusions contained

in the report are therefore those of the investigator.

11.4 In a supervised investigation the IPCC has to conﬁrm that the terms of reference and

any requirements it imposed during the investigation have been met. The appropriate

authority should conﬁrm that the IPCC is so satisﬁed. The IPCC may seek further

information, evidence and explanation from the investigator, but its role is not to

approve the report so it will not endorse the report’s ﬁndings or recommendations.

This is because the IPCC may have subsequently to consider an appeal from a complainant.

Appropriate authorities should ensure that the IPCC’s limited role in a supervised

investigation is not misrepresented to the complainant and/or any interested person.

11.5 In a managed investigation, the report is written by the investigator appointed by the

appropriate authority. However, the IPCC has direction and control of the investigation

and so the investigator should consult the IPCC’s managing investigator about the

report’s ﬁndings and conclusions. It must be borne in mind that, in the event of any

dispute between the managing investigator and the force investigator, the IPCC’s

managing investigator may attach an addendum to the report setting out his or

her ﬁndings and conclusions.

Section 11:

CONCLUDING THE INVESTIGATION

75Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 1511

The content of a report

11.6 The investigation report is the main source of information and explanation for the

complainant or interested person. The CPS, appropriate authority and the IPCC

may also rely on the report to guide them through the evidence.

At the end of an investigation of a complaint subject to special requirements or a

recordable conduct matter into the actions of a police ofﬁcer or special constable,

the investigator’s report must:

i. provide an accurate summary of the evidence

ii. attach or refer to any relevant documents; and

iii. indicate the investigator’s opinion as to whether there is a case to answer in

respect of misconduct or gross misconduct or whether there is no case to answer.

Regulation 20, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

11.7 At the end of an investigation of a complaint which is not subject to special

requirements or a DSI matter, the investigator should also produce a report

that includes an accurate summary of the evidence and attach or refer to any

relevant documents.

11.8 The report in any DSI matter should address the matters set out in

paragraph 11.38.

11.9 The IPCC expects all reports to be objective and evidence-based. In addition to the

matters above, where they apply, reports should contain only relevant information and:

• explain what the complaint, conduct or DSI matter is about

• include the terms of reference, if any, for the investigation

• give a clear account of the evidence gathered

• show that the investigation has met the objectives set for it in the terms

of reference or otherwise

• provide clearly reasoned conclusions based on the evidence

• highlight any learning opportunities for either an individual or the

organisation, where appropriate, even where no allegation is substantiated

• be written in plain language free of technical jargon.

Section 11:

CONCLUDING THE

INVESTIGATION

76Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 1511

Section 11:

CONCLUDING THE

INVESTIGATION

Conclusions: All investigations

11.10 A report should provide a clear narrative explanation, based on the evidence

collated, as to what the evidence suggests may have happened and the context

within which any conduct under investigation should be considered. This should

make sure that the complainant or interested person is provided with a clear

explanation of the relevant evidence gathered by the investigation and which

addresses their allegations or the terms of reference of the investigation.

11.11 In all investigations (DSIs, conduct matters, complaint investigations subject

to special requirements and those that are not) investigators, in coming to their

conclusions, have to analyse evidence and make ﬁndings on facts, only to the

extent necessary to reach ﬁnal conclusions (or to assist the appropriate authority

regarding unsatisfactory performance). The guidance below outlines what

conclusions are available in relation to each type of investigation.

11.12 In reaching conclusions, investigators should apply the balance of probabilities

standard of proof. The “balance of probabilities” standard of proof is not a sliding

scale; it is a single unvarying standard. In deciding whether something is more

likely than not to have occurred, regard should be had to all of the available

evidence and the weight to be attached to it, including consideration of the

extent to which that occurrence may be inherently probable or improbable.

11.13 Investigators should take particular care not to unnecessarily reach ﬁndings of

fact in conduct matter or complaint investigations that have become subject to

special requirements. In these types of investigation, investigators should evaluate

the evidence and indicate whether in their opinion there is a case to answer (see

paragraphs 11.31 to 11.35 below in relation to this test). It is unnecessary

(and unlawful) for investigators to reach ﬁndings of fact that are conclusive of

misconduct or gross misconduct – these ﬁndings should be left for any subsequent

misconduct hearing or meeting. Often investigators are faced with conﬂicting

accounts of the facts from, for example, a police ofﬁcer and the complainant.

Sometimes an account is inherently implausible or is undermined by other

evidence (such as CCTV or documentary evidence). In other cases that may not

be so and therefore, at the time the report is being prepared, it is a case of one

person’s word against the other. This is often the case in court proceedings and

does not mean that there is no case to answer. A misconduct hearing or meeting

can take into account witnesses’ evidence and cross-examination along with their

demeanour in order to make a decision about which account to accept, just as

courts do daily. Where two accounts are on an analysis of the evidence equally

credible, and where on one account, if proved, an ofﬁcer may have misconducted

himself, it will usually be appropriate to indicate that, in the investigator’s opinion,

there is a case to answer and for the misconduct hearing or meeting to decide

which of the accounts is to be preferred.

11.14 The following sections outline the different conclusions which are available in

different types of investigation. In summary, a decision about whether to uphold

or not uphold a complaint should only be made where the investigation is not

subject to special requirements. If the complaint includes issues of misconduct

or lawfulness (civil or criminal), then the report should not reach a determinative

ﬁnding in relation to these issues. Reaching concluded determinations on these

issues is for the subsequent misconduct meeting or hearing or court.

77Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 1511

Unsatisfactory Performance

11.15 In an investigation, which has not been subject to special requirements or if it has

and no case to answer for misconduct is found, the investigation report can, if

applicable, draw attention to evidence which suggests that the performance of

the person to whose conduct the investigation relates may have been satisfactory

or unsatisfactory. This should always be included where the weight of the

evidence suggests that the performance may have been unsatisfactory.

11.16 It is for the appropriate authority or the IPCC, not the investigator, to reach the

ﬁnal decision as to whether there may have been unsatisfactory performance.

‘Lawfulness’ complaints

11.17 A complaint can be about the lawfulness of police ofﬁcer conduct (for example,

the making of an arrest is both an ‘act’ and a ‘decision’ and falls within the

deﬁnition of ‘conduct’). If there is a critical need to offer a view as to the

lawfulness of conduct it must be couched in the language of an indication of

opinion on the matter. In relation to complaint investigations concerning

lawfulness that have not become subject to special requirements, an investigator

can decide whether to uphold, or not uphold, a complaint, providing that the

report makes clear that no ﬁnal determination is being reached on lawfulness.

Mixed Complaints

11.18 Often what may be called a complaint in the singular will in fact contain several

different allegations. In such cases, even where complainants have not itemised

the distinct elements, the investigator will frequently break down the complaint

into its elements for the purpose of analysis in the report. The separate elements

are often “mixed”, including allegations of service delivery failure and individual

misconduct, so that some may be subject to special requirements and others not.

11.19 Whilst it is possible to formally split the investigation

, it is also possible to deal

with them in the same report and to uphold (or not) the complaints that were not

subject to special requirements. However, it is very important that the terms of

reference, if need be by amendment, clearly itemise the allegations and identify

those parts which are subject to special requirements and those which are not.

This should only be done where there is a clear distinction between the elements

of the complaint, so that upholding the non special requirements elements does

not appear to determine matters which are also the subject to the investigator’s

case to answer opinion.

Conclusions: Investigation of complaints not subject to special requirements

11.20 Where relevant, it may also be appropriate to explain in the ﬁndings of the

report why the investigation did not become subject to special requirements

(i.e. that there has been no indication of a criminal offence or behaviour which

would justify disciplinary proceedings, see paragraphs 9.29 to 9.34) . This may

be particularly useful where the original complaint did make allegations of

individual misconduct.

Section 11:

CONCLUDING THE

INVESTIGATION

Regulation 25, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

78Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 1511

11.21 In the case of an investigation into a complaint not subject to special

requirements, there will be no decision to make about whether there is a case

to answer for misconduct or gross misconduct. The report should therefore

state whether the complaint should be upheld or not upheld (subject to the

qualiﬁcations outlined below).

11.22 As set out above, the investigator may also want to draw attention to matters

which would help the appropriate authority or IPCC decide whether there may

have been unsatisfactory performance.

Standard of service complaints

11.23 A complaint can be made about the conduct of a person serving with the police

and ‘conduct’ includes acts, omissions, statements and decisions. An investigation

may conclude that a person’s complaint should be upheld because, in the

circumstances, the force did not deliver the service standard expected because

of, for example, systemic failings (regardless of the absence of indications of

misconduct or individual ofﬁcer failings).

11.24 Where appropriate, reaching this ﬁnding is necessary so that an assessment

can be made by the police force as to what steps should be taken to improve

the service provided to the public.

11.25 A complaint should be upheld where the ﬁndings of the investigation show that

the service provided by the police did not reach the standard a reasonable person

could expect. In deciding what that standard of service is, the investigator and

appropriate authority should apply an objective test: that of a reasonable person

in possession of the available facts. They should have regard to any agreed service

standards and any national guidance that applies to the matter.

11.26 An investigation into more than one complaint may result in separate complaints

being upheld but on different bases.

The ﬁnal decision concerning upholding a complaint

11.27 It is for the appropriate authority (in a local or supervised investigation) or the

IPCC (in a managed investigation) to reach the ﬁnal decision as to whether to

uphold a complaint. Complaints may also be upheld as part of determining an

appeal about a relevant ﬁnding of a local or supervised investigation – see

section 13.

11.28 Where there is a difference between the conclusion of the investigator and the

decision reached by the appropriate authority or the IPCC, the reasons for this

should be noted in the rationale for the ﬁnal decision. The decision(s) of the

appropriate authority or the IPCC should, if possible, be communicated to the

complainant and any interested person.

Section 11:

CONCLUDING THE

INVESTIGATION

79Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 1511

Complaint investigations subject to special requirements and recordable conduct

matter investigations

11.29 Having analysed the evidence, investigators must give their opinion on whether

any subject of the investigation has a case to answer for gross misconduct or

misconduct or whether there is no case to answer.

11.30 A determination should not be made at any time (including following the

conclusion of any disciplinary proceedings) about whether a complaint which

has been investigated subject to special requirements should be upheld or not.

The ‘case to answer’ test

11.31 The investigator should indicate that in their opinion there is a case to answer

where there is sufﬁcient evidence, upon which a reasonable misconduct meeting

or hearing could, on the balance of probabilities make a ﬁnding of misconduct or

gross misconduct.

11.32 It follows from the case to answer test, that where the investigators opinion is

that there is a case to answer, a subsequent misconduct hearing or meeting may,

nonetheless, make different ﬁndings of fact and/or about whether the conduct

breached the Standards of Professional Behaviour. Therefore, although the

investigators must still explain the evaluation of the evidence that has caused

them to come to such a conclusion, they must be careful to stop short of

expressing ﬁndings on the very questions that will fall to be answered by the

disciplinary proceedings, court or tribunal which may consider the matter.

11.33 The position is slightly different where the investigator’s evaluation of the

evidence enables them to conclude, and report, that in fact there is no such

case to answer. If, for example, the evidence in a case had demonstrated

beyond question that the ofﬁcer had been abroad on the afternoon of the

alleged incident, so that the complaint against him was obviously misdirected,

the investigator can make clear ﬁndings on the evidence to that effect and to

report that there was no case for him to answer.

11.34 No ﬁnding of misconduct or gross misconduct can be made unless there has

been a breach of the Standards of Professional Behaviour. There is no requirement

to indicate in the report the precise breach of the Standards of Professional

Behaviour for which, in the investigator’s opinion there is a case to answer.

However, it is likely to assist in explaining why the investigator has reached

a case to answer ﬁnding to indicate which Standard(s) they have in mind.

11.35 In deciding whether to indicate that, in their opinion, there is a case to answer

for misconduct or gross misconduct, the investigator must consider whether the

alleged misconduct, if proved, would amount to a breach of the Standards that

is so serious as to justify dismissal and if so, should indicate that, in their opinion,

there is a case to answer for gross misconduct. If not considered this serious, then

the investigator should indicate that, in their opinion, there is a case to answer for

misconduct only. The investigator should make clear in the report the reason why

the particular case to answer ﬁnding has been reached.

Section 11:

CONCLUDING THE

INVESTIGATION

80Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 1511

The Police Reform Act 2002 deﬁnes misconduct as “a breach of the Standards of

Professional Behaviour” and gross misconduct as “a breach of the Standards of

Professional Behaviour that is so serious as to justify dismissal.”

Paragraph 29, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Recommendations

11.36 Based on the evidence that has come to light during the investigation, the

investigator may include recommendations in the report about possible action

to be taken by police forces. These recommendations may relate, for example,

to training, changes in policy/procedure or enhanced supervision.

11.37 The following charts provide an overview of the ﬁndings which are available

in different types of investigation.

11.38 Complaint

Section 11:

CONCLUDING THE

INVESTIGATION

Complaint

Complaint dealt with subject

to special requirements

Must/should it

be referred?

Is there any

indication of

criminality or conduct

justifying disciplinary

proceedings?

Investigation not

subject to special

requirements

Available findings:

• Complaint upheld

or not

• If relevant

indications of

performance

Yes

Available findings:

• Case to answer

• If relevant indications

of performance

81Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 15

11.39 Conduct matter

Conduct matter

Must/should it

be referred?

Available findings:

• Case to answer

• If relevant indications

of performance

11.40 Death or serious injury matter

DSI matter

Is there any

indication of

criminality or conduct

justifying disciplinary

proceedings?

Has there

been a complaint?

The matter should

be dealt with as a

conduct matter

see Para 11.29

The matter should

be dealt with as

a complaint

Yes

Available findings:

• If relevant indications

of potential performance

Section 11:

CONCLUDING THE

INVESTIGATION

82Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 1511

11.41 The table below summarises the types of ﬁndings which are available in

each type of PRA investigation.

Available ﬁndings

Case to answer Complaint – Performance

uphold or not

Complaint

investigation

subject to special

requirements

Complaint

investigation not

subject to special

requirements

Conduct matter

investigation

Indicate the

investigators opinion

on whether

each subject has a

case to answer for

misconduct or gross

misconduct or no

case to answer

It may be

instructive to

explain the evidential

basis on which it was

decided that there

were no special

requirements

Indicate the

investigators opinion

on whether

each subject has a

case to answer for

misconduct or gross

misconduct or no

case to answer

Decide whether

each complaint

should be upheld

or not upheld

(subject to the

qualiﬁcations

detailed in

paragraph

11.18-11.27)

n/a (there is

no complaint

to uphold)

If relevant, draw attention

to evidence which may be

the basis for a determination

of whether or not each

subject’s performance was

satisfactory or unsatisfactory

(this may be particularly

relevant where a ﬁnding

of no case to answer has

been reached in relation

to a particular subject)

If relevant, draw

attention to evidence

which may be the basis

for a determination of

whether or not each

subject’s performance

was satisfactory

or unsatisfactory

If relevant, draw attention

to evidence which may be

the basis for a determination

of whether or not each

subject’s performance was

satisfactory or unsatisfactory

(this may be particularly

relevant where a ﬁnding

of no case to answer has

been reached in relation

to a particular subject)

Section 11:

CONCLUDING THE

INVESTIGATION

Type

investigation

Section X:

TITLE

Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 1511

DSI investigation No (if there was

any indication of

a criminal offence

or behaviour

justifying disciplinary

proceedings, these

matters would have

become a conduct

matter (see

paragraphs

9.24 to 9.28)

It may be instructive

to explain the

evidential basis on

which it was decided

that there were no

indications of conduct

matters during the

investigation

n/a (there is

no complaint

to uphold)

If relevant, draw

attention to evidence

which may be the basis

for a determination of

whether or not each

subject’s performance

was satisfactory

or unsatisfactory

Criticism

11.42 No criticism or adverse comment against an individual who is capable of being

identiﬁed should appear in a report unless that individual has had an opportunity

to respond to that criticism or adverse comment. This applies not only to persons

serving with the police, but to anyone identiﬁed in the report. Normally, criticism

or adverse comments will be put to the individual during an interview, but they

can also be drawn to the individual’s attention in other ways, such as by serving

the notice of investigation on the person subject to investigation or providing a

copy of the complaint to the person complained against.

11.43 When drafting the report, if it appears to the investigator that the person

criticised or subject to comment has not had an opportunity to respond to

it then either:

i. the criticism or adverse comment should be removed from the report (unless

to do so would undermine the ﬁndings or adequacy of the explanation); or

ii. a letter should be sent to the relevant individual informing them of what the

criticism is and the facts or evidence which support the criticism. The recipient

must then be given a reasonable opportunity to respond to that criticism. The

investigator should consider any response and decide whether the criticism or

adverse comment should be amended or removed from the report. It may also

be appropriate to include the response in the report.

Available ﬁndings

Case to answer Complaint – Performance

uphold or not

Type

investigation

84Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 1511

Section 11:

CONCLUDING THE

INVESTIGATION

Who receives the report?

The report in a local investigation must be submitted to the appropriate authority.

The report in a supervised and managed investigation must be submitted to the

IPCC and a copy sent to the appropriate authority.

The report in a DSI investigation must be submitted to the IPCC and a copy sent

to the appropriate authority.

Paragraphs 22 and 24A, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

What does the IPCC expect the appropriate authority to do with the report?

Local and supervised investigations

When it receives a report after a local or supervised investigation into a complaint

or conduct matter, the appropriate authority must determine whether the report

should be referred to the Director of Public Prosecutions (CPS) (see paragraphs

12.37 to 12.43).

In addition, the appropriate authority must determine:

i. whether or not any person to whose conduct the investigation related has a

case to answer in respect of misconduct, gross misconduct or no case to answer

ii. whether or not any such person’s performance is unsatisfactory

iii. what action, if any, the authority will take in respect of the matters dealt with

in the report; and

iv. what other action (if any) the authority will take in respect of those matters.

Paragraph 24, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

11.44 These decisions are for the appropriate authority, not the investigator.

Once it has made these decisions, and subject to the harm test, the appropriate

authority must notify the complainant (where there is one) and any interested

person of:

i. the ﬁndings of the report

ii. its determinations; and

iii. the complainant’s right of appeal.

Paragraph 24, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

85Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 1511

11.45 Appropriate authorities should ensure that a complainant or interested person receives

a clear explanation of what has happened based on the facts established in the

investigation. In most cases the investigation report will be sent to the complainant

and any interested person unless there is a reason under the harm test not to do so.

Managed and independent investigations

In a managed or independent investigation, the IPCC will determine whether to

notify the CPS and send it a copy of the report. A copy of the report will be sent to

the appropriate authority and the IPCC will notify the appropriate authority that it

must determine:

i. whether any person to whose conduct the investigation related has a case to

answer in respect of misconduct, gross misconduct or has no case to answer

ii. whether or not any such person’s performance is unsatisfactory

iii. what action, if any, the authority will take in respect of the matters dealt with

in the report; and

iv. what other action (if any) the authority will take in respect of those matters.

The appropriate authority must make those determinations and submit

a memorandum to the IPCC setting out:

i. its determinations

ii. its reasons if it decides not to bring any disciplinary proceedings against

that person.

Paragraph 23, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

11.46 The IPCC expects the appropriate authority’s memorandum as soon as practicable

having made its determinations and in any event, within 15 working days of the

request. Its determinations should be clear and well reasoned so that the IPCC can

consider the memorandum and decide whether to make recommendations. The IPCC

may seek further information from the appropriate authority when considering

the memorandum.

11.47 When it receives the memorandum, the IPCC will decide whether to accept the

appropriate authority’s determinations and whether to make any recommendations

or directions under paragraph 27, Schedule 3 of the Police Reform Act 2002.

Section 11:

CONCLUDING THE

INVESTIGATION

86Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 1511

The IPCC may make a recommendation that:

i. a person serving with the police has a case to answer for misconduct or gross

misconduct or no case to answer

ii. the person’s performance is unsatisfactory or not

iii. disciplinary proceedings of a form speciﬁed are brought against the person

in respect of his or her conduct, efﬁciency or effectiveness; and/or

iv. disciplinary proceedings are modiﬁed so as to deal with speciﬁed aspects of that

person’s conduct, efﬁciency or effectiveness.

If the appropriate authority does not take steps to give full effect to the IPCC’s

recommendation, then the IPCC may direct the appropriate authority to take such

steps. The appropriate authority must comply with the IPCC’s direction.

Paragraph 27, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

11.48 The IPCC will require conﬁrmation from the appropriate authority of the steps

that have been taken to give effect to the recommendation or direction.

The appropriate authority is under a duty to ensure that any disciplinary proceedings

brought in accordance with an IPCC recommendation or direction are brought to a

proper conclusion.

Paragraph 27, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Death or serious injury (DSI) investigation outcomes

11.49 The outcomes of a DSI investigation will reﬂect the fact that it is not an inquiry

into any criminal, conduct or complaint allegation against any person serving with

the police.

11.50 The purpose of a DSI investigation is to establish facts, the sequence of events and

their consequences. Its role is to investigate how and to what extent, if any, the

person who has died or been seriously injured had contact with the police, and the

degree to which this caused or contributed to the death or injury.

Section 11:

CONCLUDING THE

INVESTIGATION

87Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 1511

At the end of a DSI investigation, the investigator must submit a report to the IPCC

and send a copy to the appropriate authority. The IPCC must determine whether the

report indicates that a person serving with the police may have committed a criminal

offence or behaved in a manner justifying the bringing of disciplinary proceedings. If

the IPCC decides that it does, it will notify the appropriate authority. The appropriate

authority must then record the matter as a conduct matter and consider whether it

should be referred to the IPCC. Subject to any decision by the IPCC to re-determine

the form of the investigation, the investigator of the DSI matter must investigate the

conduct matter.

Where there is no such indication, the IPCC may make recommendations or give

advice under section 10(1) (e) of the Police Reform Act 2002 as it considers

necessary or desirable.

Paragraphs 24A – 24C, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

11.51 The appropriate authority must respond to those recommendations indicating

where it accepts them and where it does not, what action it will take as a result

and its rationale for those decisions. The IPCC may also wish to follow up whether

and how these changes have been implemented.

Publication

11.52 The IPCC is responsible for publishing investigation reports in managed and independent

investigations. Chief ofﬁcers should consider whether it would enhance public

conﬁdence if they also published reports into local and supervised investigations.

Publication may require some redaction.

Section 11:

CONCLUDING THE

INVESTIGATION

88Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 1512

Section 12:

ACTION AFTER

THE INVESTIGATION

12.1 This section deals with the range of actions that may follow receipt of an investigation

report. These include conduct outcomes, unsatisfactory performance procedures, and

criminal and inquest proceedings. The section also covers other actions that may ﬂow

from the report’s conclusions, such as apologising and identifying learning.

12.2 Section 12 sets out what the IPCC expects an appropriate authority to do after it

receives a report. The detail of the action to be taken will vary depending on whether

the investigation was a local or supervised investigation.

Communication with the complainant and interested persons after the conclusion of

the investigation

In local and supervised investigations it is the appropriate authority’s responsibility

to communicate and explain the reasons for its decisions about its determinations

and action it will take following receipt of the ﬁnal report.

For independent and managed investigations, the IPCC must explain its decisions

and reasons for its determinations about the action to be taken in respect of the

matters dealt with in the report.

As already outlined in 11.32 to 11.33 onwards, after a local or supervised

investigation, the appropriate authority must notify the complainant and/or

any interested person of:

i. the ﬁndings of the report

ii. its own determinations; and

iii. the complainant’s right of appeal.

The information to be provided to the complainant and any interested person

will be subject to the harm test.

Paragraph 23 and 24, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

12.3 The appropriate authority should ensure that a complainant and any interested

person receives a clear explanation of what has happened based on the facts

established in the investigation. In most cases the investigation report will be sent

to the complainant and any interested person unless there is a reason under the

harm test not to do so.

Section 12:

ACTION AFTER THE INVESTIGATION

89Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 15

12.4 Appropriate authorities should take into account any further guidance issued by

the IPCC concerning disclosure of information. They may discharge their duty to

inform complainants and interested persons of the ﬁndings of the investigation by

sending them a copy of the investigation report.

12.5 The IPCC believes that communication with complainants and interested persons should

be based on a presumption of openness. Making the investigation report available to the

complainant and/or interested person is the most transparent way of showing what

the investigation has found. It should usually be provided to the complainant and any

interested person, subject to the harm test

and any necessary redactions. In some

circumstances, where there is a difference between the recommendation made by the

investigator and the decision reached by the appropriate authority, it will be necessary

to provide the investigation report together with the ﬁnal decision and rationale for it.

12.6 Complainants, interested persons and their representatives sometimes ask for

additional disclosure, such as copies of statements or documentation collected

during the investigation. The IPCC considers that disclosure of material generated by

a complaint investigation should occur through the appropriate disclosure gateway

(i.e. the Police Reform Act 2002; disclosure to other public bodies; disclosure for the

purposes of civil proceedings; disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act 2000

or the Data Protection Act 1998). All this means is that the complainant, interested

persons and their representatives should make it clear on what basis they are asking

for this additional disclosure so that the appropriate authority can apply the

relevant legal basis for disclosing it.

12.7 If, for example, a complainant, interested person or their representative wants to

understand the report better, the request should be made and considered under the

PRA gateway. The disclosure should then be aimed at providing the complainant with a

better understanding of the ﬁndings of the investigation. The presumption of openness

applies in favour of disclosure subject to the harm test, with appropriate redaction being

made where necessary and providing disclosure does not incur unreasonable expense.

Any non-disclosure must be necessary because there is a real risk of the disclosure

causing a signiﬁcant adverse effect. The risk must be real, which is to be assessed on

a case-by-case basis. Therefore, appropriate authorities should not adopt a blanket

approach when considering whether disclosure should be made in any given case.

12.8 The IPCC believes that it would be disproportionate for disclosure to take place which

burdens the investigating authorities with unreasonable expense and this is recognised

by regulation.

It would reduce the time available for investigators to conduct other

investigations thus having a negative impact on those other investigations. Where

an appropriate authority decides that disclosing documentation to the complainant,

interested person or their representative would incur unreasonable expense, it should

consider whether some disclosure could be made that is not unreasonably expensive

or whether it is possible to satisfy the request by some other means, for example by

inviting the complainant, interested person or their representative to inspect the

documents sought. However, where disclosure of underlying evidence can take place in

accordance with the harm test and without incurring unnecessary expense, the IPCC

considers that the disclosure should take place.

Section 12:

ACTION AFTER

THE INVESTIGATION

Paragraph 24, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Paragraph 24, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002 and Regulation 13, Police (Complaints & Misconduct) Regulations 2012

Regulation 13, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

90Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 15

12.9 The names of persons serving with the police who play a signiﬁcant role in the matters

under investigation should not normally be redacted. They may, however, be redacted

if there is good reason under the harm test; for example, if their names have to be

kept secret for operational reasons, such as, for example, surveillance ofﬁcers. When

interviewed or asked to give any form of account, persons serving with the police should

raise with the investigator any reasons there may be for keeping their names conﬁdential.

Pseudonyms may be used where there are good reasons for keeping the person’s

identity conﬁdential, but their real names and relevant pseudonyms must be recorded

elsewhere. Where an inquest has been opened, the coroner should be consulted about

the identiﬁcation of such individuals in the report and in the inquest.

Apologies

12.10 The IPCC expects appropriate authorities to apologise where a complaint is

upheld. A sincere and timely apology can have a signiﬁcant effect and also

demonstrate a willingness to learn after something has gone wrong.

12.11 Careful consideration should be given to the timing of any apology. The earlier it

is delivered, the more positive the outcome is likely to be. Delaying delivering an

apology can diminish its value when it is ﬁnally received. If it becomes apparent

that an apology is appropriate before the end of an investigation, it is not necessary

to wait until the investigation is complete before issuing an apology.

12.12 Consideration also needs to be given to the most appropriate person to deliver an

apology. The IPCC expects a chief ofﬁcer to deliver any apology given by a force in

relation to police actions or omissions that have caused or contributed to a person’s

death or serious injury. In other cases, if the apology relates to an organisational failing

rather than that of an individual, a manager or supervisor should deliver the apology.

12.13 If the complaint is upheld because of the behaviour of a person serving with the

police and he or she is willing to apologise, appropriate authorities should facilitate

this and support the individual concerned in making the apology. Alternatively, it

may be appropriate for a manager or supervisor to convey a personal apology on the

person’s behalf, if he or she is unable to meet or speak to the complainant.

12.14 Appropriate authorities should also consider whether it would be appropriate to

apologise to any interested person in respect of any recordable conduct or DSI matters.

Outcomes for individuals

12.15 This guidance brieﬂy describes conduct outcomes for police ofﬁcers and police

staff following investigation under the Police Reform Act 2002.

Section 12:

ACTION AFTER

THE INVESTIGATION

91Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 15

Subject to any IPCC recommendation, which the appropriate authority accepted, or a

direction made under paragraph 27, Schedule 3 of the Police Reform Act 2002, if following

receipt of the investigation report, the appropriate authority determines (either in the case

of police ofﬁcers or special constables) that there is no case to answer in respect of either

misconduct or gross misconduct, the only outcomes that are available are:

i. no further disciplinary action under the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2012

ii. management action; or

iii. for the matter to be dealt with under the Police (Performance) Regulations 2012.

If the appropriate authority concludes that there is a case to answer for misconduct

then either management action or misconduct proceedings may follow. Those

proceedings will be a misconduct meeting, unless the ofﬁcer or special constable has:

i. a ﬁnal written warning in force at the date of the severity assessment made

in relation to the conduct; or

ii. been reduced in rank under the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2004 less than 18

months before the severity assessment made in relation to the conduct. In such

cases, the misconduct proceedings will be a misconduct hearing.

If the appropriate authority concludes there is a case to answer for gross

misconduct, this may only be heard at a misconduct hearing.

Regulation 19, Police (Conduct) Regulations 2012

12.16 It may be relevant to look at an ofﬁcer or special constable’s history when deciding

the most appropriate course of action. This is consistent with the expectation that

ofﬁcers and special constables should learn from mistakes.

12.17 In the case of members of police staff and contracted-out staff, the possible

outcomes will depend on their contract of employment and the disciplinary

and capability procedures and policies that apply.

Allegations involving discrimination

12.18 Proven discriminatory words or acts should be dealt with at the more serious end of the

spectrum in terms of disciplinary action, and in many cases it will be entirely appropriate

that a person serving with the police should face disciplinary proceedings for complaints

of discriminatory behaviour. However, in cases where the behaviour is clearly unwitting

and not motivated by lack of respect for speciﬁc groups of people, the response should

focus on changing the behaviour or attitudes. There may also be circumstances where

a person serving with the police has acted with evident integrity, but the outcome was

unfair to the complainant or interested person. In any case, the outcome should be based

on the evidence, take account of the attitude of the person who is the subject of an

investigation and the effect on the person discriminated against.

Section 12:

ACTION AFTER

THE INVESTIGATION

92Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 15

12.19 Where a person’s attitude seems to reﬂect a similar negative attitude within

the team or department, the appropriate authority also has a responsibility

to consider whether any action is required to address these issues.

12.20 Close supervision may be needed for a person serving with the police who has

behaved, for example, with a lack of courtesy. In this case it is important that the

supervisor knows how the person’s behaviour can be managed. Any decision regarding

supervision should be made with the explicit agreement of the supervisor.

Special case procedures

12.21 ‘Special case’ procedures

provide a fast track misconduct procedure. They can be

used only if the appropriate authority certiﬁes the case as a special case or the IPCC

recommends or directs such certiﬁcation. Special case procedures can take place

only in relation to an investigation of a complaint or recordable conduct matter

before the completion of the investigation.

12.22 A special case is:

• one where there is sufﬁcient evidence in the form of written statements or

other documents to prove, on the balance of probabilities, that the conduct

to which the investigation relates constitutes gross misconduct; and

• that it is in the public interest for that police ofﬁcer or special constable to

cease to be a member of a police force or be a special constable without delay.

12.23 An investigator will therefore need to keep under review the possibility of

proposing the use of the special case procedure as the investigation proceeds

and the evidence is obtained.

12.24 In a managed investigation, the investigator should consult with the IPCC’s

managing investigator before submitting any statement or report in a

special case.

Unsatisfactory performance procedures

12.25 Action under the unsatisfactory performance procedures (UPP) may also be an

outcome of an investigation under the Police Reform Act either because the

appropriate authority has made a decision that UPP is appropriate or because the

IPCC has recommended or directed UPP.

12.26 In addition, investigating a complaint may bring to light underlying issues that

may not have led directly to the complaint, but still need to be dealt with. In many

circumstances, these will be issues that can be dealt with through UPP.

12.27 The fundamental purpose of UPP is to improve performance. The use of UPP, where

appropriate, is to improve the performance of an individual, the overall performance

of the force, to respond to complaints, and to improve public conﬁdence. The use

of UPP also encourages individuals and managers to take responsibility for

unsatisfactory behaviour.

12.28 The Police (Performance) Regulations 2012 apply to police ofﬁcers (of the rank

of chief superintendent or below) and special constables.

Section 12:

ACTION AFTER

THE INVESTIGATION

Paragraphs 20A-20H Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Paragraph 20A, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

93Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 15

12.29 Unsatisfactory performance or attendance is quite different from misconduct and

gross misconduct. Misconduct and gross misconduct involve a breach of the Standards

of Professional Behaviour

whereas unsatisfactory performance or attendance concerns

the ofﬁcer or special constable’s ability or failure to perform their role to a satisfactory

level. His or her performance may be unsatisfactory, but not breach the Standards of

Professional Behaviour.

12.30 If the appropriate authority determines that there is a case to answer for

misconduct or gross misconduct, then the case should not be dealt with under

the Police (Performance) Regulations 2012.

12.31 It can be hard to distinguish precisely between unsatisfactory performance and

misconduct. However, the following principles should be taken into account:

• a deliberate failure to perform the duties of a police ofﬁcer or special constable

satisfactorily would not normally be unsatisfactory performance

• a failure to perform the role satisfactorily through lack of competence or

capability on the ofﬁcer or special constable’s part, should generally be dealt

with as unsatisfactory performance

• unsatisfactory performance may be more readily identiﬁed by a pattern of

behaviour, rather than a single incident (although a single incident may sufﬁce).

12.32 When reaching conclusions following any investigation, the appropriate authority

should always consider whether it would be appropriate to use UPP to deal with

failings by individuals.

12.33 When a decision is made to deal with the matter under the Police (Performance)

Regulations 2012 or the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2012, the person making the

determination should keep a clear record of the decision made and its rationale.

12.34 The Police (Performance) Regulations 2012 do not apply to senior ofﬁcers, members

of police staff, or contracted out staff. In the case of members of police staff or

contracted out staff, the relevant contract of employment and their relevant

disciplinary and capability procedures and policies apply.

Public hearings

The IPCC may direct that the whole or part of a third stage meeting which has not been

preceded by a ﬁrst or second stage meeting (in the case of unsatisfactory performance)

or a misconduct hearing (not a special case hearing) be held in public. This power to

direct arises where the IPCC has conducted an independent investigation and it considers

that, because of the gravity of the case or other exceptional circumstances, it would be in

the public interest to so direct.

Regulation 40, Police (Performance) Regulations 2012 and Regulation 31, Police (Conduct)

Regulations 2012

12.35 Depending on the circumstances of the case, the IPCC may consult with other

parties, such as the CPS.

Section 12:

ACTION AFTER

THE INVESTIGATION

Regulation 3, Police (Conduct) Regulations 2012

94Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 15

12.36 Before ﬁnalising how it will comply with any such direction, the appropriate authority

should consult the IPCC about the intended location for the hearing, its planned

arrangements for enabling the attendance of the complainant or interested person,

if any, other members of the public, and representatives of the media. It should also

consult the IPCC about any modiﬁcations to its normal procedure proposed by the

person presiding at the hearing to take account of the hearing’s public nature and the

anticipated interest of the general public in the proceedings and their outcome. Any

additional cost resulting from the public status of the hearing will be met by the

appropriate authority.

Communication of outcomes

An appropriate authority must inform the IPCC, the complainant and any interested

person of the outcome of disciplinary proceedings, including the fact and outcome

of any appeal, in respect of any matters dealt with in a report submitted under

paragraph 22, Schedule 3 of the Police Reform Act 2002.

Regulation 12, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

Criminal proceedings

If a report indicates a criminal offence may have been committed and the IPCC (for

managed and independent investigations) or the appropriate authority (for local

and supervised ones) considers it to be appropriate for the matters dealt with in

the report to be considered by the CPS or they fall within a prescribed category, the

report must be referred to the CPS.

Paragraph 23 and 24, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

12.37 The reason(s) for a decision not to refer to the CPS should be clearly documented.

12.38 In a local or supervised investigation, the complainant will have a right of appeal

in respect of the appropriate authority’s decision not to send the report to the CPS.

There is no right of appeal in relation to a complaint relating to a direction and

control matter.

12.39 Given that the information for summary criminal offences must be laid within six

months of the date of their alleged commission,

the appropriate authority should

ensure that any determination or notiﬁcation it makes is done in time to avoid the

offence being time barred.

12.40 In a managed or independent investigation, it is for the IPCC to make the

determinations whether a report should be referred to the CPS.

12.41 Where a case is referred to the CPS, the person referring the matter should ensure

that the CPS is given relevant information to enable him or her to initiate effective

liaison with the complainant and/or interested person.

Section 12:

ACTION AFTER

THE INVESTIGATION

Section 127, Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980

Paragraph 23, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

95Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 15

12.42 Appropriate authorities and investigators should ensure a good working relationship

with the CPS. In the event of any doubt about their roles and responsibilities, the

investigator should consult with the CPS. In managed cases, the IPCC’s managing

investigator must be involved in the liaison between the CPS and the investigator for

the purpose of any criminal proceedings.

12.43 If a local or supervised investigation results in a person serving with the police being

charged with a criminal offence, then the appropriate authority is responsible for

informing the complainant or interested person of the outcome(s) of those criminal

proceedings. In the case of a managed or independent investigation, the IPCC will be

responsible for providing this information.

Learning lessons

12.44 Investigations can provide valuable feedback about the service provided by the

police and are an important source of learning to help forces improve the service

they offer. Many investigations will reveal signiﬁcant learning outcomes for local

and/or national policing.

12.45 The IPCC expects appropriate authorities to consider whether there is any learning to

be derived from each investigation. The IPCC and the police service have developed

standard terms of reference to capture learning from investigations. These should be

used in managed and supervised investigations. The IPCC also expects appropriate

authorities to adopt the same or a similar approach in local investigations. They should

develop standard terms of reference or other operating procedures to encourage

consistent and regular reporting of learning from investigations. These should include

mechanisms for rapid reporting of learning to senior managers in the force or beyond

before an investigation has been completed and a ﬁnal report prepared.

12.46 Where relevant learning has been identiﬁed, whether for the organisation and its

management or for national police bodies, investigators should produce information

that can be publicised to the local police service and, where appropriate, reported

through ACPO to the IPCC for possible inclusion in the Learning the Lessons bulletin.

The IPCC encourages appropriate authorities to extend this approach to learning

that goes towards the duty to promote equality of opportunity and eliminate

unlawful discrimination.

12.47 It may be appropriate to consider drafting a separate ‘learning report’ or

alternatively a separate part of the investigation report. The reason for this

separation is to facilitate wider dissemination and learning as it may not be

appropriate to share the full facts of the investigation widely.

12.48 In managed investigations, the IPCC requires investigators to use a template.

This includes:

• an overview of the key facts found and their context

• the conclusions and corresponding recommendations, and suggestions

for the local force or national policing organisations

• actions taken to implement those recommendations that are agreed.

Section 12:

ACTION AFTER

THE INVESTIGATION

96Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 15

12.49 Appropriate authorities should have regard to practical advice issued by the IPCC

on the completion of a learning report.

The report’s size and scope will depend

on the nature of the investigation, its complexity and the speciﬁc lessons found.

12.50 It is important that what is in fact an individual’s misconduct or unsatisfactory

performance is not unduly attributed to organisational failings. It is equally

important that an individual is not blamed for organisational failings. However,

learning and misconduct or unsatisfactory performance are not always mutually

exclusive. A person serving with the police might reasonably have been expected

to act differently without, for example, being given speciﬁc training.

12.51 Where an investigation uncovers both organisational learning and misconduct

or unsatisfactory performance, it is important to explain, in the section of the

investigation report that deals with any misconduct or unsatisfactory performance,

why those organisational failings do not affect the conduct. If this is not done, the

organisational failings may be used as a defence in any misconduct or UPP.

12.52 In managed investigations, the IPCC will ensure that recommendations that affect

national policing policy or legislation are consistent with its own policy and previous

recommendations. Procedures have been agreed to ensure consultation with, and

the approval of, the IPCC to achieve this. Appropriate authorities should adopt similar

approaches in local and supervised investigations to encourage consistency within

the relevant police force.

Implementing recommendations

12.53 The IPCC may ask an appropriate authority what action it intends to take in respect

of (among other things) any learning recommendations made at the conclusion of

an investigation. The appropriate authority should respond to the IPCC accordingly

with an action plan as soon as reasonably practicable and, in any event, within 28

days of the request.

12.54 Where changes are to be initiated, this plan should detail the changes planned, the

timescale(s) for implementation, the managers identiﬁed as responsible for putting

these changes into action, and how the impact of the changes will be monitored.

The IPCC may have further comment on the proposed action plan and appropriate

authorities should have regard to them before implementing any changes. The IPCC

may also wish to follow up whether and how these changes have been implemented.

12.55 The IPCC expects practice in supervised and local investigations to mirror the

arrangements in managed investigations, with an action plan setting out the

actions to be taken. Following a supervised or local investigation of a complaint,

the appropriate authority should consider sending the action plan to the complainant

and any interested person. In a supervised investigation it may decide to copy the plan

to the IPCC for its information. Appropriate authorities should also consider providing

a copy to the person or persons to whose conduct the investigation related.

Section 12:

ACTION AFTER

THE INVESTIGATION

Practical advice is available on the IPCC website – www.ipcc.gov.uk

97Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 1512

Local and national reporting of lessons from investigations

12.56 Many professional standards departments report the learning from investigations

to their respective forces in a regular bulletin or e-communication, particularly

following complaints. The IPCC encourages chief ofﬁcers and local policing bodies

to consider ways in which learning from investigations can be reported regularly

to those who would beneﬁt.

12.57 Local recommendations, their corresponding ﬁndings and the events from which

they arise may appear to have only local signiﬁcance. However, the Learning the

Lessons bulletin now regularly publishes such accounts. They have been shown to

provide important learning for the entire police service. They highlight systemic or

practical risks for strategic and operational managers and supervisors to be aware

of so that they can reduce or avoid them. Examples of good practice identiﬁed by

the investigation may also merit consideration by the police service as a whole.

12.58 Investigators in supervised and local investigations should consider whether it

would be appropriate to share a learning report with the police service nationally

so that it can be considered for wider dissemination through the IPCC’s Learning

the Lessons bulletins.

IPCC recommendations under paragraph 28A of Schedule 3

When recommendations may be made

When the IPCC has:

i. received a report on a DSI investigation or a report on a supervised, managed

or independent investigation into a complaint or conduct matter; or

ii. determined an appeal against:

• a local/supervised investigation, or

• the outcome of the local resolution of a complaint or the outcome of a

complaint handled otherwise than in accordance with Schedule 3 of the

Police Reform Act (see paragraphs 13.61 to 13.66)

The IPCC may make a recommendation about a matter dealt with in the report or

appeal. The IPCC must publish these recommendations.

Paragraph 28A, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Timescale for responding to a recommendation

The recipient of the recommendation must provide a response to the IPCC

within 56 days of the recommendation being made, unless either the IPCC

grants an extension to this time limit or there is a judicial review challenge.

Paragraphs 28A and 28B, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Section 12:

ACTION AFTER

THE INVESTIGATION

98Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 1512

12.59 If the chief ofﬁcer or local policing body wishes to request an extension to the

time limit for responding to the recommendation, the request should be made in

writing to the IPCC before the deadline with an explanation for the request and

an indication of the date when a response will be provided.

Content of a response

12.60 There is no obligation for chief ofﬁcers or local policing bodies to implement an

IPCC learning recommendation, however they must provide a response.

Publishing responses to recommendations

12.61 If the chief ofﬁcer or local policing body believes that the response, or part of it,

should not be published, they must provide representations to the IPCC explaining

the reasons for this. The IPCC will make a decision about whether the response will

be published or not, taking into account the representations made.

12.62 The IPCC will advise the chief ofﬁcer or local policing body in advance of when it

will publish the response in order to allow them to publish at the same time.

12.63 Chief ofﬁcers and local policing bodies should publish recommendations and

their response on their websites in a way which is clear and easy to ﬁnd. This will

increase transparency by allowing members of the public to ﬁnd recommendations

and responses on local websites, not just from the IPCC.

The response must state:

i. what action the chief ofﬁcer or PCC the recommendation was addressed to has

taken or proposes to take in response to the recommendation, or

ii. why the chief ofﬁcer or PCC has not taken, or does not propose to take, any action

in response.

Paragraphs 28A and 28B, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

The IPCC must publish the response to the recommendation within 21 days of

receipt. The local policing body or chief ofﬁcer who has made the response must

publish the response (in the same amount of detail as the IPCC), along with the

original recommendation, at the same time the IPCC publishes the response.

Paragraphs 28A and 28B, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Section 12:

ACTION AFTER

THE INVESTIGATION

99Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 1512

Inquest proceedings

12.64 Where an investigation is carried out in relation to a death of a person and an inquest

is likely or has already been opened, this may delay any disciplinary proceedings until

after the conclusion of the inquest. Delay is not a necessary consequence of the fact

that there is an inquest and appropriate authorities should consider whether it is

possible to conclude the disciplinary proceedings since this is likely to be in the

interests of all those involved.

12.65 In most cases, an investigation will be completed before the inquest is held. If this is

so, then the appropriate authority must make its determinations in respect of the

ﬁnal report as soon as practicable after receiving it. Furthermore, the appropriate

authority should conclude any resulting misconduct proceedings or UPP resulting

from that determination in accordance with the timescale prescribed in the relevant

regulations. If proceedings occur before the inquest takes place, the coroner should

be informed of the date for any meeting or hearing and its result unless there are

good reasons not to provide this information.

12.66 Where an inquest follows a managed investigation into the circumstances of the

death, lead responsibility for liaison with the coroner rests with the IPCC. Given that

the police produce the ﬁnal report under IPCC guidance, it may be more appropriate

for a member of the police force to attend court should the coroner require someone

to attend the hearing to assist with statements, documents and other evidence, or

to give evidence about the investigation.

12.67 Where an inquest follows a local or supervised investigation into the circumstances

of the death, lead responsibility for liaison with the coroner rests with the investigator.

Section 12:

ACTION AFTER

THE INVESTIGATION

100Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 1513

Section 13:

APPEALS

13.1 This section explains the different rights of appeal that exist for a complainant and

sets out the legislative framework. From 22 November 2012, the responsibility for

determining appeals is shared between the IPCC and the chief ofﬁcer. This section

provides guidance on how an appeal to the chief ofﬁcer should be dealt with.

Principles of appeal handling

13.2 An appeal offers a ﬁnal opportunity to consider whether the complaint could have

been handled better at a local level and, where appropriate, to put things right. If a

complainant is still dissatisﬁed after an appeal he or she may seek to challenge the

appropriate authority’s decision through judicial review.

13.3 An appeal should be dealt with in good faith, fairly and in a timely manner.

13.4 Appeals should be handled consistently and proportionately.

13.5 Consideration of an appeal must involve a fresh consideration of the case. Although

it is not a re-investigation it should not merely be a ‘quality check’ of what has

happened before.

13.6 An appeal must be given impartial consideration. There needs to be clear

separation between the original decision-maker and the person who decides

the appeal.

13.7 The complainant’s appeal contains their representations, which must be given

due consideration.

13.8 The person who made the decision that is being appealed should be allowed the

opportunity to comment on the appeal so that this can be taken into account

when determining it.

13.9 The right of appeal allows the complainant to challenge a decision or outcome.

If the appeal is upheld, relevant action must be taken by the appropriate authority.

13.10 The complainant and, where applicable, the person complained about should be

provided with a clear explanation of the outcome of the appeal and the reason for

any decision made.

Section 13:

APPEALS

101Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15

Who considers the appeal?

The Police Reform Act 2002 provides a right of appeal in respect of certain decisions

and outcomes made in relation to a complaint. These are:

i. a decision not to record a complaint or not to notify the correct appropriate

authority (or a failure to make a determination whether it is the appropriate

authority or decide to record or notify)

ii. a decision to disapply the requirements of Schedule 3 of the Police Reform Act

2002 in relation to a complaint

iii. the outcome of the local resolution of a complaint

iv. the outcome of a complaint handled otherwise than in accordance with Schedule

3 of the Police Reform Act 2002

v. a decision to discontinue the investigation of a complaint; and

vi. certain determinations and outcomes relating to a local or supervised

investigation into a complaint.

Paragraphs 3, 7, 8A, 21 and 25, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

13.11 When informing the complainant of a decision that carries a right of appeal, the

local policing body or the chief ofﬁcer must also inform the complainant of who

will consider that appeal.

13.12 Depending on the circumstances of the complaint, an appeal will be considered

by either the chief ofﬁcer of the relevant appropriate authority or the IPCC.

Section 13:

APPEALS

102Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15

IPCC is the relevant

appeal body for the

entire complaint

(including any part

of it which does

not fall within

these boxes)

Appeal determined by

chief officer

Is it an appeal against

non-recording?

Appeal determined

by IPCC

Yes

Does the complaint

relate to the conduct of

a senior officer?

If proved,

would the complaint

justify criminal/misconduct

proceedings or involve the

infringement of a person’s

rights under Article

2 or 3?

Has the complaint

been/must it be

referred to the IPCC?

Does the

complaint arise from

the same incident as a

complaint falling within

one of the above

3 boxes?

Yes

Right of appeal arises

Section 13:

APPEALS

103Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15

13.13 When determining who should consider the appeal, the local policing body or the

chief ofﬁcer should ask the following questions:

i. is it an appeal about a failure to determine if it is the appropriate authority

or to record or notify a complaint?

ii. is the complaint that is the subject of the appeal about the conduct of a senior

ofﬁcer (an ofﬁcer holding a rank above chief superintendent)?

iii. if proved, would the conduct as described in the complaint either justify

criminal or misconduct proceedings or involve the infringement of a person’s

rights under Article 2 or 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights?

iv. has the complaint that is the subject of the appeal been referred to the IPCC

or must it be referred?

v. does the complaint arise from the same incident as a complaint falling within

sub-paragraphs i-iv above?

vi. does part of the complaint that is the subject of the appeal fall within any

of the sub-paragraphs outlined in ii-iv above?

13.14 If the answer to all of these questions is no, the right of appeal is to the

chief ofﬁcer.

13.15 If the answer to any of these questions is yes, the right of appeal is to the IPCC.

13.16 The test listed at 13.13 iii above must be applied to the substance of the complaint,

not applied with hindsight after the complaint has been dealt with. It means that if

the appropriate authority cannot satisfy itself from the complaint as presented that

the conduct complained about, if proved, would not lead to criminal or misconduct

proceedings against a person serving with the police or infringe Article 2 or 3 of the

European Convention on Human Rights, any appeal in relation to that complaint

must be dealt with by the IPCC regardless of how the complaint has been dealt with

or any ﬁndings in relation to the complaint.

13.17 When considering whether a complaint arises from the same incident as another

complaint, appropriate authorities should consider whether the complaints arise from

the same time and place and involve the same or substantially similar persons serving

with the police. A number of separate complaints that are otherwise unconnected, but

arise from the same large-scale event should not be considered as having arisen from

the same incident.

Appeals to the chief ofﬁcer

13.18 Assigning the responsibility for some appeals to chief ofﬁcers is designed to

ensure that more complaints are dealt with, and thus resolved, locally. However,

chief ofﬁcers will need to be mindful of the importance of public conﬁdence in the

complaints system and should ensure that any arrangements they put in place to

determine appeals allow objective decision making.

13.19 As this section is focusing on the role of the chief ofﬁcer in determining appeals,

references to ‘chief ofﬁcer’ are to the chief ofﬁcer as the relevant appeal body,

unless otherwise speciﬁed.

Section 13:

APPEALS

104Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15

Delegation of the consideration of appeals

Where the chief ofﬁcer is the relevant appeal body he or she may delegate his or her

responsibilities in relation to appeals to a police ofﬁcer of at least the rank of chief

inspector or police staff member who is of at least a similar level of seniority.

The chief ofﬁcer may not delegate these responsibilities to a person whose involvement

in that role could reasonably give rise to a concern as to whether he or she could act

impartially, whether because that person has acted as the investigating ofﬁcer in the

case or attempted to resolve the complaint by way of local resolution or otherwise.

Regulation 30 and 33, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

13.20 The IPCC considers that chief ofﬁcers should not delegate the consideration

of an appeal to the following:

i. anyone who was involved in the local resolution of the complaint or the

investigation process (either carrying out tasks, advising on the case or

making the ﬁnal decision) that is subject to appeal

ii. anyone involved in the decision to disapply or discontinue that is subject

to appeal

iii. anyone overseeing or supervising the decision that is subject to appeal (this

means involvement in the decision itself rather than having a general

supervisory role over the person making the decision)

iv. the person in whose name the notiﬁcation of the decision subject to appeal

was sent as this could lead the complainant to believe that both the original

decision and the appeal decision have been made by the same person

v. anyone of a lower rank than the person who made the decision subject to

appeal (or equivalent for police staff)

vi. anyone who has a personal connection to the person serving with the police

or to the incident subject of the complaint, or anyone who is the immediate

line manager of the person serving with the police.

13.21 In many circumstances, the type of case that will come to the chief ofﬁcer on appeal

will have been dealt with by local management. Therefore, consideration of the appeal

by the professional standards department (PSD) will provide sufﬁcient distance for an

objective review. Where an appeal relates to actions taken by the PSD, the chief ofﬁcer

should consider carefully whether another member of the PSD will be viewed as being

capable of carrying out an objective review or whether the appeal should be considered

by a person from another department. This may mean that in some forces, more

complaints will need to be dealt with initially by local management to allow for a

two-stage process.

Section 13:

APPEALS

105Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15

13.22 The fundamental consideration for the chief ofﬁcer when deciding to delegate his or

her power to consider appeals is whether the person to whom he or she proposes to

delegate is a person whose involvement in the role could reasonably give rise to a

concern about whether he or she could act impartially. This is an objective test. The

chief ofﬁcer should consider whether a reasonable person could have concerns about

whether the person deciding the appeal could act impartially. If the answer to that

question is yes, then someone else should be appointed to determine the appeal.

13.23 The IPCC considers it good practice to tell the complainant who has considered the

appeal and why he or she is an appropriate person to do so. In some circumstances

this may reassure the complainant. It is important for public conﬁdence that the

complainant feels that his or her appeal has been given full consideration by an

appropriate person.

13.24 In order to assist in maintaining conﬁdence in the appeals process, chief ofﬁcers

should develop an internal process for quality checking the handling of appeals

and ensuring that they are dealt with appropriately.

13.25 Chief ofﬁcers should also develop and disseminate a scheme of delegation to

ensure that the right people at the right levels and with the right training are

allocated as decision makers. In the interests of accountability and transparency, it

is good practice to make the scheme of delegation available on the force website.

Notiﬁcation and receipt of appeals

Where a chief ofﬁcer (or a local policing body) notiﬁes the complainant of a decision

which carries a right of appeal, he or she must notify the complainant in writing of:

i. the existence of the right of appeal

ii. the body to whom the appeal should be made

iii. where the relevant appeal body is the IPCC, the reason why

iv. that there is no right of appeal to the IPCC, where the chief ofﬁcer is the relevant

appeal body; and

v. the time limit for making the appeal.

Regulation 11, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

13.26 It is important that the right appeal body is identiﬁed and clearly communicated to

the complainant in order to avoid appeals being made to the incorrect appeal body

creating delay and unnecessary administrative work for the complainant, appropriate

authorities and the IPCC. Appropriate authorities should be in a position to respond

quickly and fully to any enquiries from the IPCC where there is any uncertainty about

whether the correct relevant appeal body has been identiﬁed.

Section 13:

APPEALS

106Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15

If an appropriate authority receives an appeal which should be considered by the

IPCC, the appeal must be forwarded to the IPCC and the complainant notiﬁed that

the appeal has been forwarded and that the IPCC is the relevant appeal body. The

appeal will be taken to have been made when it is forwarded.

Paragraph 32, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

13.27 It is important that the appeal is forwarded as soon as reasonably practicable.

In order to aid timeliness this should be done, where possible, by email or fax.

13.28 When an appeal is received, unless it can be immediately identiﬁed as not being

a valid appeal, a letter acknowledging receipt of the appeal must be sent to the

complainant. This should inform the complainant when they can expect to hear

about their appeal and what they can expect to happen. It should also give the

complainant a point of contact should he or she have any queries.

Appeals to the IPCC

13.29 When the IPCC receives an appeal for which it is the relevant appeal body it will

notify the local policing body or chief ofﬁcer concerned of the appeal. Once notiﬁed

that an appeal has been made, the local policing body or the chief ofﬁcer should

not take any action that would prejudice the appeal or any action that may be

taken as a result.

The IPCC may request any information which it considers necessary to deal with an

appeal from any person. Any information requested by the IPCC for this purpose

must be supplied.

Regulation 11, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

13.30 The IPCC expects any information it requests to be provided within ﬁve working

days of the request.

If the IPCC receives an appeal which should be considered by the chief ofﬁcer of a

force, the IPCC will forward the appeal to the chief ofﬁcer and notify the complainant

that the appeal has been forwarded and that the chief ofﬁcer is the relevant appeal

body. The appeal will be taken to have been made when it is forwarded.

Paragraph 31, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Section 13:

APPEALS

107Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15

Appeal validity

13.31 There are a number of reasons why an appeal may be judged to be invalid. If

it is judged that an appeal is invalid, the complainant should be advised of this

determination and the reason for the decision should be explained clearly.

Consider the appeal

Is the appeal complete?

Is there a right of appeal?

Yes

Is the appeal in time?

Yes

Appeal received

Section 13:

APPEALS

108Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15

Is the appeal complete?

An appeal must be in writing and state:

i. the details of the complaint

ii. the date on which the complaint was made

iii. the name of the force or local policing body whose decision is the subject

of the appeal

iv. the grounds for the appeal; and

v. the date on which the decision to which the appeal relates was given

to the complainant.

However, the relevant appeal body (or the IPCC in the case of a non-recording appeal)

may decide to consider an appeal even though it does not comply with one or more

of these requirements.

Regulation 11, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

13.32 It may still be possible to consider an appeal even if the reasons given for the appeal

are minimal (or absent), or show a lack of understanding of the complaints system.

An appeal should usually be considered in the absence of any of the information

above unless the lack of information makes it impossible to identify the case to

which the appeal relates.

13.33 In some circumstances it may be appropriate to contact the complainant to clarify

the points he or she is raising, or if it is not clear to which complaint the appeal

relates. If, after taking all reasonable steps to contact the complainant, it has not

been possible to make contact with them or it has not been possible to gather

sufﬁcient information to consider the appeal, the appeal may be considered invalid.

Is there a right of appeal?

13.34 The complaint to which the appeal relates must have come to the attention of the

appropriate authority on or after 22 November 2012. If the complaint was made

before this date the appeal will be dealt with in accordance with the relevant

previous Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations.

13.35 Only a complainant, or someone acting on his or her behalf, can bring an appeal

(of any type) in relation to a complaint (see ‘Who can complain’ in section three for

the deﬁnition of a complainant). If anyone other than the complainant or someone

acting on his or her behalf tries to make an appeal, the appeal is invalid.

13.36 Before an appeal can be made there should be a ﬁnal decision, clearly dated,

which can evidence the decision being appealed. The exception to this is where

the appeal is in relation to the non-recording of a complaint and no decision has

been made. In this case the IPCC will consider any appeal made 15 working days

or more after the complaint was submitted.

Section 13:

APPEALS

109Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15

Is the appeal in time?

There is no right of appeal in relation to a complaint that relates to a direction and

control matter in the following cases:

i. an appeal against a decision by the appropriate authority to disapply the

requirements of Schedule 3 of the Police Reform Act 2002

ii. an appeal against the outcome of any complaint that is subject to local

resolution or handled otherwise than in accordance with Schedule 3 of the

Police Reform Act 2002

iii. an appeal against a decision by the appropriate authority to discontinue an

investigation (where that discontinuance is not within the IPCC’s power); or

iv. an appeal with respect to an investigation.

Paragraphs 7, 8A, 21 and 25, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

There is no right of appeal against a failure by the local policing body to determine

whether it is the appropriate authority, to notify or record a complaint if the complaint

relates to a direction and control matter.

Paragraph 3C, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

There is no right of appeal against a decision by the appropriate authority

to disapply or discontinue where the IPCC has given permission.

Paragraph 7 and Paragraph 21, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

There is no right of appeal against a decision to discontinue an investigation

(where that discontinuance is within the IPCC’s power).

Paragraph 21, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Appeals must be made within 28 days of the day after the date of the letter from

the local policing body or chief ofﬁcer giving a notiﬁcation of the decision which

is capable of appeal to the complainant.

Except in the case of a non-recording appeal, if the appeal has been made to the

wrong appeal body, it will be treated as having been made when it is forwarded by

the chief ofﬁcer or the IPCC to the correct relevant appeal body. However, any time

elapsing between the appeal being received by the chief officer or the IPCC and

being forwarded on to the correct relevant appeal body will not be taken into

account for the purposes of the 28 day period.

Regulation 11, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

Paragraph 31 and 32, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Section 13:

APPEALS

110Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15

13.37 The IPCC expects the notiﬁcation to the complainant to specify the date by which

the appeal should be received and for it to be posted on the day it is dated. If any

of the information required in the notiﬁcation has not been given (or there is no

evidence that it has been given), the appeal should not be treated as out of time

and should be given full consideration.

13.38 Whether such special circumstances exist will be a matter for the person dealing

with the appeal to consider on a case-by-case basis. Where an appeal has been made

out of time, the complainant should be asked to provide any reasons why the appeal

is late. Any reasons provided should be taken into account when deciding whether

an appeal should be considered. The following matters should also be taken into

account (though this is not an exhaustive list):

• any reasons for the delay – including whether the delay is outside the complainant’s

control and whether he or she has taken all reasonable steps to submit his or her

appeal in time. This should include consideration of any particular vulnerabilities or

needs of the complainant – for example, medical conditions, disabilities or where

English is not his or her ﬁrst language

• the subject matter of the complaint – is this a particularly serious case or one

in which there would be real public interest?

• links to other complaints that may be being investigated or appealed

• the length of the delay – the test should become more difﬁcult to pass the

further beyond 28 days the appeal is received

• the fairness of the case – for example, the potential impact on the complainant

or any other member of the public and on those subject to the investigation.

13.39 The fact that a notice of investigation (see paragraph 9.39) may have been

withdrawn before an appeal was made does not prevent an appeal from being

considered. Even if a notice of investigation has been withdrawn, disciplinary

proceedings may follow a successful appeal.

13.40 If, following consideration, the appeal is judged to be out of time and there are

no special circumstances making it just to extend the time, the appeal should

be treated as invalid and the appeal should not be considered further.

Notifying the complainant where the appeal is invalid

13.41 The complainant should be informed of the decision to treat the appeal as invalid.

This notiﬁcation should be made in writing (and by any other means where the

complainant has asked for such communication) as soon as reasonably practicable.

The reasons for considering the appeal as invalid should be explained clearly to

the complainant.

The relevant appeal body (or the IPCC in the case of a non-recording appeal) may

extend the period for making an appeal where it is satisﬁed that because of the

special circumstances of a case it is just to do so.

Regulation 11, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

Section 13:

APPEALS

111Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15

Appeals against a failure to notify or record a complaint or to determine whether it is

the appropriate authority (non-recording appeals)

13.42 If the appeal is upheld, the chief ofﬁcer or the local policing body must follow any

direction given to it by the IPCC as to the action to be taken for making a determination

or for notifying or recording a complaint.

In determining whether the chief ofﬁcer

or local policing body has failed to make a decision or to record or notify, the IPCC will

take into consideration its expectation that any decision about recording will be

made within ten working days of a complaint being received.

There is a right of appeal to the IPCC against the non-recording of any complaint

except where:

i. there is no requirement to record the complaint because the subject matter

of the complaint has been or is already being dealt with by means of criminal

or disciplinary proceedings against the person whose conduct it was

ii. there is no requirement to record the complaint because the complaint has been

withdrawn; or

iii. the complaint is about direction and control and the appeal relates to a failure

by the local policing body.

Paragraph 3A-3C, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

There are three potential grounds for an appeal against the non-recording of

a complaint:

i. a failure by the chief ofﬁcer or local policing body to determine whether or not

it is the appropriate authority

ii. a failure by the chief ofﬁcer or local policing body to notify the correct appropriate

authority about the complaint; or

iii. a failure by the chief ofﬁcer or local policing body to record a complaint or part

of a complaint.

Paragraph 3, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Section 13:

APPEALS

Paragraph 3, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

112Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15

Appeals against the decision to disapply

Consideration of appeals against the decision to disapply

13.43 When determining an appeal against a decision to disapply, the person dealing

with the appeal should take the following points into consideration:

• has the complaint been, or should the complaint have been, referred to the

IPCC? If so, the complaint should not have been subject to any decision to

disapply without the approval of the IPCC and the appeal must be upheld

• was the decision to disapply made with the permission of the IPCC? If so, there

is no right of appeal and the appeal should be considered as invalid; and

• was the complainant offered the opportunity to make representations before

the decision to disapply was made and if any representations were provided,

were these taken into account in making the decision to disapply?

Chief officer or local

policing body to follow any

directions made

Appeal considered by IPCC

Appeal against non-recording

An appeal may be made to the relevant appeal body against a decision to disapply

the requirements of Schedule 3 of the Police Reform Act 2002. However there is no

right of appeal where the complaint relates to a direction and control matter or

where the IPCC has given its permission for the disapplication.

Paragraph 7, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

The chief ofﬁcer (where he or she is the relevant appeal body) must determine

whether the decision to disapply the requirements of Schedule 3 of the Police

Reform Act 2002 should have been taken.

Paragraph 7, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Section 13:

APPEALS

113Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15

13.44 The disapplication decision should show on which ground the decision to disapply

has been made and the reason why that ground was considered appropriate. The

guidance below covers each ground for disapplication separately; however the

guidance on disapplications in section four of this guidance should also be taken

into account.

More than 12 months have passed between the incident, or the latest incident, and the

complaint and either no good reason for the delay has been shown or injustice would

be caused by the delay

13.45 Where the complaint relates to a series of incidents, the person dealing with the

appeal must ensure that the date used as a benchmark for the 12-month period

is the date of the most recent incident.

13.46 Assuming that the 12-month period has passed, the person dealing with the appeal

must also assess whether the appropriate authority should have determined:

i. no good reason for the delay has been shown; or

ii. injustice would be likely to be caused by the delay.

The matter is already the subject of a complaint made by or on behalf of the

same complainant

13.47 The disapplication decision should include details of the previous complaint and

why this new complaint is the same. The person dealing with the appeal must

ensure that the complaint is against the same officer originally complained

against, relating to the same subject and by the same complainant.

13.48 The person dealing with the appeal should ensure that, at the time of the decision to

disapply, the handling of the previous complaint was still ongoing. If not, disapplication

under this ground is not appropriate.

Anonymous complaints

13.49 Although it is unlikely that an appeal will be made relating to an anonymous

complaint, the complainant or interested person may make his or her identity

known only after the disapplication decision has been taken. Where this happens,

the complainant should be advised of his or her right of appeal.

The complaint is vexatious, oppressive or an abuse of the procedures for dealing

with complaints

13.50 The person dealing with the appeal must assess whether the complaint meets the

deﬁnition of vexatious, oppressive or an abuse of the procedures for dealing with

complaints as set out in paragraphs 4.15 and 4.16 and section 15 of this guidance.

13.51 The person dealing with the appeal must also satisfy him or herself that the

decision has been made based on the substance of the complaint, rather than

about the complainant.

Section 13:

APPEALS

114Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15

Repetitious complaints

13.52 The person dealing with the appeal must ensure that the complaint satisﬁes the

deﬁnition of a repetitious complaint.

It is not reasonably practicable to complete the investigation of the complaint or any

other procedures under Schedule 3 to the Police Reform Act 2002

13.53 The disapplication decision should show that one of the criteria for not reasonably

practicable applies to the complaint and how it is considered to apply.

13.54 If the disapplication decision is reached on the basis of either lack of communication or

refusal or failure to co-operate; the person dealing with the appeal must consider what

efforts have been made to communicate and engage with the complainant. This should

include looking at the methods of communication used, any communication preferences

expressed by the complainant, any attempts to deal with his or her representative where

appropriate, and the efforts made to meet any particular needs of the complainant.

13.55 The person dealing with the appeal should also consider whether the complaint

could have been dealt with without the complainant’s co-operation.

13.56 If the disapplication decision is made on the basis of the lapse of time, the person

dealing with the appeal must consider whether he or she agrees that the lapse

of time is such that the completion of a satisfactory investigation is not

reasonably practicable.

Considering the appeal

13.57 The appeal must be upheld if the relevant appeal body ﬁnds that the decision to

disapply the requirements of Schedule 3 of the Police Reform Act 2002 should not

have been made.

13.58 If a decision to disapply has been based upon a single disapplication ground, the

person dealing with the appeal may consider that the particular criterion used was not

appropriate. In some circumstances, it may be clear from the information available that

another disapplication ground would apply and therefore disapplication would still

have been appropriate. Where the complainant has not had the opportunity to make

representations in relation to the new ground being considered as part of the appeal,

he or she should be given an opportunity to make representations at the appeal

stage before a decision is made about whether the appeal should be upheld.

13.59 Some complaints may consist of multiple allegations. The person dealing with the

appeal may ﬁnd that disapplication was the correct decision in relation to some

allegations, but not for others. In such circumstances, the appeal may be upheld in

part. However, action under Schedule 3 of the Police Reform Act 2002 would only

need to be taken in relation to those allegations where the decision to disapply

should not have been made.

Section 13:

APPEALS

115Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15

Directions and notiﬁcation

13.60 Where an appeal against the decision to disapply is upheld by the IPCC, the IPCC

will give whatever directions it thinks appropriate as to the action to be taken by

the appropriate authority. The appropriate authority must comply with any

directions given by the IPCC.

The chief ofﬁcer must notify the complainant of the reasons for his or her determination

in relation to the appeal. Where an appeal against the decision to disapply is upheld by

the chief ofﬁcer, the chief ofﬁcer must take whatever action he or she thinks appropriate

in relation to the complaint. The chief ofﬁcer must also notify the complainant and

the person complained against of any action he or she proposes to take in relation to

the complaint.

Where the IPCC is the relevant appeal body, it must notify the complainant and the

appropriate authority of the reasons for its determination and any directions in relation

to the appeal. The appropriate authority must notify the person complained against

of any direction the IPCC gives unless it might prejudice any criminal investigation,

pending proceedings or would otherwise be contrary to the public interest.

Paragraph 7, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Regulation 11, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

Section 13:

APPEALS

Paragraph 7, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

116Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15

Appeals against the outcome of the local resolution of a complaint or the outcome of a

complaint handled otherwise than in accordance with Schedule 3 of the Police Reform

Act 2002

Uphold appeal and take

appropriate action.

The complainant and, unless one

of the exceptions apply, the

person complained against

should be notified

Is the chief officer the

relevant appeal body?

Forward appeal

to IPCC and notify

complainant

Yes

Was the disapplication

carried out with IPCC

permission?

No right of appeal –

notify complainant

Yes

Was the disapplication

the correct decision?

Do not uphold appeal

– notify complainant

Yes

Appeal against decision

to disapply

There is a right of appeal against the outcome of any complaint which is subjected

to local resolution or is handled otherwise than in accordance with Schedule 3 of

the Police Reform Act 2002 except where the complaint relates to a direction and

control matter.

Paragraph 8A, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Section 13:

APPEALS

117Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15

13.61 An appeal against the outcome of a complaint handled otherwise than in accordance

with Schedule 3 of the Police Reform Act 2002 refers to an appeal against the outcome

of a complaint that has been the subject of a disapplication. The right of appeal relates

to the outcome of any action, including no action, taken in respect of such a complaint.

13.62 In most circumstances, the relevant appeal body for this type of appeal will be the chief

ofﬁcer. However, if a person begins to consider an appeal and ﬁnds that the complaint

was not initially suitable to be dealt with by local resolution or that the complaint

should not have been handled otherwise than in accordance with Schedule 3 of

the Police Reform Act 2002, the appeal should be upheld because the complaint

should not have been handled in such a way.

Consideration of appeals

13.63 When deciding whether the outcome is a proper one, the focus should be on

whether the outcome is appropriate to the complaint, not simply on the process

followed to reach that outcome. The decision should be made on the basis of the

evidence available.

13.64 In making a decision about the appeal, the relevant appeal body should take the

following into consideration:

• any representations the complainant has provided as part of his or her appeal

about why the outcome is not a proper outcome

• whether an action plan was drawn up and agreed with the complainant

setting out the steps to be taken when locally resolving his or her complaint.

The outcome of the local resolution should be a clear consequence of the

actions agreed

• whether both the complainant and the person complained against had the

opportunity to comment on the complaint during the local resolution process

• whether any explanation given was sufﬁciently clear and comprehensive

to address the complainant’s concerns

• if no apology has been given as part of the outcome, whether an apology

would be appropriate, taking into account the substance of the complaint;

and

• whether there is any learning from the complaint and whether this has been

identiﬁed and communicated to the complainant.

13.65 If the person dealing with the appeal ﬁnds that the outcome of the complaint

is not a proper outcome, the appeal must be upheld.

The chief ofﬁcer must decide whether the outcome of the complaint, whether it has

been locally resolved or handled otherwise than in accordance with Schedule 3 of

the Police Reform Act 2002, is a proper outcome.

Paragraph 8A, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Section 13:

APPEALS

Regulation 6, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012 prevents, during the local resolution of a complaint,

an apology being tendered on behalf of the person complained against if they have not agreed to the apology.

118Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15

13.66 An appeal may result from the fact that although the outcome is proper, it has not been

communicated effectively. In these circumstances the appeal should not be upheld, but

further information about the outcome should be provided to the complainant.

Directions and notiﬁcations

13.67 Any action taken by the appropriate authority as a result of an appeal should

be aimed at reaching a proper outcome for the complaint.

The chief ofﬁcer must notify the complainant of the reasons for his or her determination

in relation to the appeal. Where an appeal is upheld by the chief ofﬁcer, he or she must

take whatever action he or she thinks appropriate in relation to the complaint. The

chief ofﬁcer must notify the complainant and the person complained against of any

action he or she proposes to take in relation to the complaint.

Where the IPCC is the relevant appeal body, it must notify the complainant and the

appropriate authority of the reasons for its determination and any directions in relation

to the appeal. The appropriate authority must notify the person complained against

of any direction the IPCC gives unless it might prejudice any criminal investigation,

pending proceedings or would otherwise be contrary to the public interest.

Regulation 11, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

Paragraph 8A, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Section 13:

APPEALS

119Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15

Appeals against the decision to discontinue

Complaint locally resolved or

handled otherwise than in

accordance with Schedule 3

Do not uphold appeal

– notify complainant

Is the chief officer the

relevant appeal body?

Forward appeal

to IPCC and notify

complainant

Yes

Was the outcome a

‘proper’ outcome for

the complaint?

Yes

Was the

complaint suitable for

local resolution/was it

appropriate to handle it

otherwise than in

accordance with

Schedule 3?

Uphold appeal and

take appropriate

action. The

complainant and,

unless one of the

exceptions apply, the

person complained

against should

be notified

Uphold appeal and

take appropriate

action. The

complainant and,

unless one of the

exceptions apply, the

person complained

against should

be notified

An appeal may be made to the relevant appeal body against a decision by the appropriate

authority to discontinue an investigation of a complaint (where the discontinuance is not

within the Commission’s power). However, there is no right of appeal where the

complaint relates to a direction and control matter.

Paragraph 21, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Section 13:

APPEALS

120Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15

Consideration of appeals against the decision to discontinue

13.68 When determining an appeal against a decision to discontinue an investigation,

the person dealing with the appeal should consider the following questions:

• if the investigation was a local investigation, was the complaint one that

required referral to the IPCC? Is the investigation supervised or managed? If

the answer is yes to either question, the investigation can only be discontinued

with the permission of the IPCC. If the investigation was discontinued without

an application to the IPCC the appeal should be upheld

• was the discontinuance ordered or carried out by the IPCC? If so, there is no

right of appeal and the appeal should be considered as invalid

• was the complainant offered the opportunity to make representations before

the decision to discontinue was made and, if any representations were provided,

were these taken into account in making the decision to discontinue?

13.69 The discontinuance decision should show on which ground the decision was

based and the reason why that ground was felt to be appropriate. The guidance

below covers each ground for discontinuance separately, however the guidance on

discontinuances in section 10 of this guidance should also be taken into account.

The complainant refuses to co-operate to the extent that it is not reasonably

practicable to continue the investigation

13.70 The relevant appeal body must consider what efforts have been made to communicate

and engage with the complainant. This should include looking at the methods of

communication used, any communication preferences expressed by the complainant,

attempts to deal with his or her representative where appropriate, and efforts made

to meet any particular needs of the complainant.

13.71 The relevant appeal body should also consider whether the complaint could have

been investigated without the complainant’s co-operation.

Where the appropriate authority has determined the complaint is suitable for

local resolution

13.72 The relevant appeal body should consider whether the complaint passed

the suitability test for local resolution set out in paragraphs 5.10 to 5.12.

The chief ofﬁcer must determine whether the decision to discontinue the

investigation should have been taken.

Paragraph 21, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Section 13:

APPEALS

121Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15

The complaint is vexatious, oppressive or an abuse of the procedures for dealing with

complaints, conduct matters or DSI matters

13.73 The person dealing with the appeal must assess whether the complaint meets the

deﬁnition of vexatious, oppressive or an abuse of the procedures for dealing with

complaints as set out in paragraphs 10.10 to 10.12 and section 15 of this guidance.

13.74 The person dealing with the appeal must also satisfy him or herself that the decision

has been made based on the substance of the complaint and not on the basis of

the complainant.

The complaint is repetitious

13.75 The person dealing with the appeal must ensure that the complaint ﬁts the

deﬁnition of a repetitious complaint.

It is not reasonably practicable to proceed with the investigation

13.76 The person dealing with the appeal must consider the rationale given by the

appropriate authority as to why it was not reasonably practicable to proceed with

the investigation and whether he or she agrees with that rationale. The person

dealing with the appeal must decide whether it was reasonably practicable to

proceed with the investigation.

Considering the appeal

13.77 The appeal must be upheld if the person dealing with the appeal ﬁnds that the

decision to discontinue the investigation should not have been taken.

13.78 If a decision to discontinue an investigation has been made based upon a single

discontinuance ground, the person dealing with the appeal may consider that the

particular ground used was not appropriate. In some circumstances, it may be clear

from the information available that another discontinuance ground would apply and

therefore a discontinuance would still have been appropriate. Where the complainant

has not had the opportunity to make representations in relation to the new ground

being considered as part of the appeal, they should be given this opportunity at the

appeal stage before a decision about whether the appeal should be upheld is made.

13.79 Some complaints may consist of multiple allegations. The person dealing with the

appeal may ﬁnd that discontinuance was the correct decision in relation to some

allegations, but not in relation to others. In such circumstances, the appeal may be

upheld in part, however the action required to investigate would only need to be taken

in relation to those allegations where the discontinuance decision was incorrect.

Section 13:

APPEALS

122Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15

Directions and notiﬁcation

The chief ofﬁcer must notify the complainant of the reasons for his or her determination

in relation to the appeal. Where an appeal against the decision to discontinue an

investigation is upheld by the chief ofﬁcer, the chief ofﬁcer must take whatever action

the chief ofﬁcer thinks appropriate for investigating the complaint. The chief ofﬁcer must

notify the complainant and the person complained against of any action he or she

proposes to take in relation to the complaint.

Where the IPCC is the relevant appeal body, it must notify the complainant and the

appropriate authority of the reasons for its determination and any directions in relation

to the appeal. The appropriate authority must notify the person complained against of

any direction the IPCC gives unless it might prejudice any criminal investigation,

pending proceedings or would otherwise be contrary to the public interest.

Paragraph 21, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Regulation 11, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

Uphold appeal and take

appropriate action. The

complainant and, unless one of

the exceptions apply, the person

complained against should

be notified

Is the chief officer the

relevant appeal body?

Forward appeal

to IPCC and notify

complainant

Yes

Should the decision

to discontinue have

been taken?

Do not uphold

appeal – notify

complainant

Yes

Appeal against the decision to

discontinue an investigation by

an appropriate authority (where

discontinuance is not within the

IPCC’s power)

Section 13:

APPEALS

123Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15

Appeals against investigation

13.80 There is no right of appeal in respect of managed or independent investigations.

Consideration of appeals against investigation

13.81 In practice, this means that the person dealing with the appeal does not have to

consider a ground of appeal not mentioned by the complainant, but may still do so if

he or she deems it appropriate: for example, where it appears that another ground of

appeal may apply and may lead to the upholding of the appeal. The person dealing

with the appeal should consider all grounds of appeal raised by the complainant.

There is a right of appeal to the relevant appeal body in relation to an investigation

of a complaint carried out by the appropriate authority itself or supervised by the

IPCC. The only exception to this is where the complaint relates to a direction and

control matter; in which case there is no right of appeal.

Paragraph 25, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

A complainant may appeal on the following grounds:

i. that he or she has not been adequately informed about the ﬁndings of the

investigation or any determination relating to the action to be taken or not taken

in respect of the matters dealt with in the report

ii. against the ﬁndings of the investigation

iii. against the appropriate authority’s determination as to whether the person to

whose conduct the investigation related has a case to answer for misconduct,

gross misconduct or no case to answer or whether the person’s performance

is unsatisfactory or not

iv. against the appropriate authority’s determinations relating to the action to

be taken or not taken in respect of the matters dealt with in the report, or

v. against the appropriate authority’s determination not to refer the report

to the CPS.

Paragraph 25, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

The chief ofﬁcer must consider those appeal grounds that are appropriate

in the circumstances.

Paragraph 25, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Section 13:

APPEALS

124Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15

13.82 The appropriate authority must comply

and should do so as soon as reasonably

practicable (which, in practice, should not generally exceed seven days) unless the

IPCC requires this memorandum by a speciﬁed deadline.

13.83 The guidance below covers each ground of appeal separately. However, it may be

appropriate to consider them together: for example, where there are strong links

between ﬁndings and outcome.

Considering whether the complainant received adequate information

Where an appeal is brought, the IPCC may require the appropriate authority to

submit a memorandum to it setting out:

i. whether it has determined that the person to whose conduct the investigation related

has a case to answer and, if so, whether in respect of misconduct or gross misconduct

ii. whether it has determined that the person’s performance is or is not unsatisfactory

iii. what action, if any, it will take in respect of the matters dealt with in the report

iv if no disciplinary proceedings are to be brought, the reasons for that

determination; and

iv. the reasons for determining it does not need to send the report to the CPS.

Paragraph 25, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

The right of appeal relates only to whether the complainant has been given

adequate information about:

i. the ﬁndings of the investigation; or

ii. any determination of the appropriate authority relating to the action to be taken

or not taken in respect of the matters dealt with in the report.

Paragraph 25, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Section 13:

APPEALS

Paragraph 25, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

125Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15

13.84 It is essential that a full explanation is given to the complainant about what has

been found to have happened. A person whose complaint against a person serving

with the police has been investigated should receive:

• a clear narrative explanation for what has happened, based on the

facts established

• a description of the context for any behaviour complained about

• a clear statement about whether his or her complaints have been upheld

• where appropriate, whether a person serving with the police has a case to

answer for misconduct or gross misconduct or no case to answer or whether

a person’s performance is satisfactory or unsatisfactory; and

• what, if any, action is to be taken in relation to the matters dealt with

in the report.

13.85 The quality of the explanation provided, in the context of the investigation work

undertaken, should be taken into account when considering this ground.

13.86 Where an investigation report has been written, the IPCC considers that forces

should disclose it to the complainant (subject to the harm test). This means that it is

important that it is clear and easy to understand. If the report was redacted or edited

before being given to the complainant, the person dealing with the appeal should

satisfy him or herself that the relevant points in the report were not omitted

unnecessarily because of the redaction.

13.87 Where an investigation report has been written, but the complainant has been

given a decision letter instead, the person dealing with the appeal should ensure

that all relevant points in the report were also included in the letter. The person

dealing with the appeal should also consider sending the report to the

complainant as part of the appeal determination.

13.88 Where an investigator has failed to provide sufﬁcient information during the

investigation this should be highlighted to the appropriate authority to ensure that

it fulﬁls its duties to provide information to a complainant in the future. However,

an appeal cannot be upheld based on a failure to provide information during the

progress of the investigation as this falls outside the appeal grounds.

Considering the ﬁndings of the investigation

13.89 The ﬁndings of the investigation include the eventual conclusions. In their clearest

form this will be a set of allegations that are either upheld or not. The ﬁndings of the

investigation also include the reasons for the conclusions, the evidence that has been

gathered to support the conclusions, and a critical analysis of the evidence.

13.90 Guidance on ﬁndings and outcomes is contained within sections 11 and 12 of this

guidance. These sections provide information on explanations of the outcome of

an investigation, the giving of apologies where appropriate, and the making of

decisions about whether a complaint should be upheld or not.

Section 13:

APPEALS

126Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15

13.91 When determining an appeal against the ﬁndings of an investigation, the person

dealing with the appeal should consider the investigation ﬁndings, taking into account

the evidence gathered, and decide whether the investigation’s ﬁndings need to

be reconsidered. The person dealing with the appeal must develop his or her own

assessment of the case, not base it on the assessment that the investigator has made.

13.92 When communicating a decision about whether an appeal is upheld in relation to

the ﬁndings, the rationale for the decision should be provided to the complainant

with reference to the relevant evidence.

13.93 The following questions should be considered to reach a decision on the ﬁndings:

Are the conclusions reached reasonable in light of the evidence?

13.94 The appropriate authority should have looked at every allegation that the complainant

has made, for example, in a statement or letter of complaint. If the investigation has

not answered the allegations that have been made, the person dealing with the appeal

should consider whether this was an appropriate and proportionate approach, taking

into account the substance and circumstances of the case. If not, it may be appropriate

to uphold the appeal on this ground. The person dealing with the appeal should continue

to assess the ﬁndings in relation to those allegations that have been dealt with.

13.95 The person dealing with the appeal must consider whether the conclusions of

the investigation are supported by the evidence available, and ensure that a clear

rationale is being made to link the evidence to the conclusions.

Has the investigation been carried out in a proportionate manner and has sufﬁcient

evidence been gathered?

13.96 The factors listed at paragraph 9.15 of this guidance should be used to inform

what approach was proportionate for an investigator to have taken to investigate a

complaint. As an investigation has progressed, the proportionality of the response

required may have changed and this should be taken into account when considering

any appeal. Proportionality is a particular consideration when it appears that lines of

enquiry may have been missed or consciously not pursued by an investigator. However,

it is not sufﬁcient to conclude that an investigation has been proportionate without

further explanation. When considering the ‘proportionality’ of following particular lines

of enquiry a judgement is being made about the likelihood and difﬁculty of obtaining

fruitful evidence weighed against the seriousness of the allegations. When considering

the ‘proportionality’ of the investigation as a whole, a judgement is being made about

the scope and robustness of the investigation weighed against the seriousness of the

allegations. Where appropriate it should be made clear to the complainant why the

person dealing with the appeal has deemed a particular approach to be disproportionate.

Section 13:

APPEALS

127Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15

13.97 In considering the lines of enquiry pursued by the investigator, the person dealing

with the appeal should take into account any terms of reference or similar document,

such as an investigation log or ﬁle record of relevant decisions, that may have applied

to the scope and methods used during the investigation. This may have required

a particular direction to be taken by the investigation or put limits on what the

investigation would examine, including the availability of evidence required and

considerations as to the sufﬁciency of the evidence to establish the facts of the case

given the seriousness of the allegation and likely outcomes.

Have the right decisions been made about whether or not the complaint(s) that have

been investigated should be upheld?

13.98 Guidance in paragraphs 11.18 to 11.24 outlines where a complaint should be upheld.

The person dealing with the appeal should have regard to this guidance when

reviewing an appeal and considering whether a complaint should have been upheld.

A decision on whether each complaint has been upheld or not should be clear from

the ﬁle and the person dealing with the appeal should satisfy him or herself that the

correct decisions have been reached. If the person dealing with the appeal decides

that the ﬁndings need to be reconsidered then the appeal should be upheld and the

appropriate authority must then re-investigate the complaint.

It is the ﬁnal decision

made by the appropriate authority as to whether each complaint is upheld

or not that is subject to appeal, not any ﬁndings made by an investigator to the

appropriate authority. Such ﬁndings and their rationale may, however, be useful

in considering whether the right decisions have been reached.

Considering whether there is a case to answer or whether a person’s performance

is unsatisfactory

13.99 The person dealing with the appeal should be satisﬁed that the ﬁndings do not

need to be reconsidered before considering whether the determinations about

the action to be taken are appropriate.

13.100 The person dealing with the appeal should assess whether the appropriate authority’s

decisions and the action to be taken, if any, are appropriate. If they are not, then the

appropriate authority should take action, which he or she considers appropriate, in

relation to the bringing of disciplinary proceedings.

The person dealing with the appeal must decide if he or she considers the

appropriate authority’s decision is appropriate as to:

i. whether the person subject of investigation has a case to answer in respect

of misconduct, or gross misconduct or no case to answer

ii. whether the person’s performance is unsatisfactory or not; and

iii. whether the action, if any, to be taken by the appropriate authority is appropriate.

Paragraph 25, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Section 13:

APPEALS

Paragraph 25, Schedule 3 of the Police Reform Act 2002

128Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15

13.101 Finding that there is a case to answer means that the person dealing with the

appeal is of the opinion that there is sufﬁcient evidence upon which a reasonable

misconduct hearing or meeting could ﬁnd on the balance of probabilities, gross

misconduct or misconduct.

Considering whether the proposed action is appropriate

13.102 The proposed action in respect of an investigation could include the possibility of

disciplinary proceedings.

13.103 The action could also include non-disciplinary action – recommendations regarding

force practices or policies that are suggested by the circumstances of the complaint

and its investigation.

13.104 In terms of the determinations as to whether any disciplinary proceedings should

be brought against persons serving with the police, the person dealing with the

appeal should judge whether the proposed action is appropriate based on the

seriousness of the conduct in respect of which ﬁndings have been made and the

underlying evidence. The person dealing with the appeal should assess each case

on its own merits but, for example, may consider the following factors:

• the background to the incident in which the alleged conduct took place

• whether an individual has shown remorse for what happened

• whether the alleged action was accidental, negligent or deliberate; and

• whether the person serving with the police has admitted to the conduct

alleged and, if so, at what stage he or she did so.

13.105 A clear rationale should be provided for any action to be taken as a result

of the appeal.

Considering whether a referral to the CPS should have been made

13.106 When considering whether the circumstances are such that it is appropriate for

the report to be considered by the CPS, this decision must be made in light of the

report’s findings and the evidence gathered and the reasons given by the

appropriate authority for not referring the report to the CPS.

The person dealing with the appeal should consider whether the following

conditions are satisﬁed:

i. the report indicates that a criminal offence may have been committed by

a person to whose conduct the investigation related, and

ii. the circumstances are such that it is appropriate for the report to be considered

by the CPS, or

iii. any of the matters in the report fall within any prescribed category of matters.

Paragraph 25, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Section 13:

APPEALS

129Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15

13.107 Many of the issues that are relevant here will have been considered when looking

at the findings of the investigation. A full rationale will be required when it is

determined that a referral to the CPS is not necessary despite the report indicating

that a criminal offence may have been committed.

Following an appeal against investigation: determinations, directions and notiﬁcation

When a chief ofﬁcer upholds an appeal, he or she shall, depending on the appeal

ground upheld:

i. take such steps as he or she considers appropriate for ensuring the complainant

is properly informed

ii. reinvestigate the complaint

iii. take such action as he or she considers appropriate in relation to the bringing of

disciplinary proceedings and ensure that any such proceedings are proceeded

with to a proper conclusion; and/or

iv. notify the CPS of the determination and send it a copy of the investigation report.

The chief ofﬁcer must give notiﬁcation of any determination to the complainant,

to any interested person and (unless it may prejudice any proposed review or

re-investigation of the complaint) the person complained against.

Paragraph 25, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Where the IPCC is the relevant appeal body and an appeal is upheld, the IPCC shall

(depending on the appeal ground upheld):

i. give directions to the appropriate authority to ensure the complainant is

properly informed

ii. review the ﬁndings, without further investigation

iii. direct a reinvestigation of the complaint

iv. determine whether to make recommendations under paragraph 27, Schedule 3,

Police Reform Act 2002

v. direct the appropriate authority to notify the CPS of the determination and send

it a copy of the investigation report.

The appropriate authority must comply with any directions given to it by the IPCC.

Paragraph 25, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Section 13:

APPEALS

130Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15

Uphold appeal and take

appropriate action. The

complainant and, unless one of

the exceptions apply, the person

complained against should

be notified

Consider the appropriate

appeal grounds

Should the appeal

be upheld

on any of the

appeal grounds?

Is the chief officer the

relevant appeal body?

Forward the appeal

to the IPCC and

notify complainant

Do not uphold the

appeal – notify the

complainant and the

person complained

against

Yes

Appeal against investigation

Section 13:

APPEALS

131Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1514

Section 14:

DATA COLLECTION

AND MONITORING

14.1 The IPCC has a statutory duty to secure and maintain public conﬁdence in the police

complaints system.

The co-operation and participation of all the other bodies that

operate and oversee the complaints system – forces, local policing bodies, Her Majesty’s

Inspector of Constabulary (HMIC), and others – is essential in carrying out this duty.

14.2 The handling of complaints, conduct matters and DSI matters provides one of the

most valuable feedback mechanisms for the police service. Chief ofﬁcers and local

policing bodies should have a commitment to learn, whether from individual cases

or from broader analysis of the complaints system, and to share that learning both

internally and externally.

14.3 The IPCC, police forces, local policing bodies, ACPO, and policing partners all have

a role to play in ensuring that learning is captured, disseminated and monitored.

14.4 The IPCC expects police forces and local policing bodies to monitor complaints,

particularly allegations of discriminatory behaviour. Monitoring allows regular review

of the types of complaints being made, helps to identify any emerging trends and

encourages forces and local policing bodies to consider how, and whether, the number

of complaints can be reduced. Learning from complaints is an important element of

the complaints system.

Responsibilities of the chief ofﬁcer

14.5 Each chief ofﬁcer is responsible for the overall running and performance of his or

her force. There is, therefore, a clear interest for the chief ofﬁcer in the learning that

arises from the complaints system and in performance data that gives a picture of

what is happening within the force and can be used as a means of comparison

with similar forces. The chief ofﬁcer should use this information as an evidence

base to inform planning and improvement for the force.

14.6 The IPCC expects the chief ofﬁcer to:

• respond to the IPCC on recommendations in IPCC investigation reports

and appeal decisions

• report regularly to his or her local policing body on progress of the

implementation of recommendations that have been accepted

• promote and ensure the identiﬁcation of learning and recommendations

from appeals considered within the force

• provide information to the IPCC on learning in relation to the relevant

performance framework indicators

Section 14:

DATA COLLECTION AND MONITORING

Section 10, Police Reform Act 2002

132Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 15

• support the professional standards department in setting and maintaining

quality standards in handling complaints, conduct matters and DSI matters

across the force.

14.7 The chief ofﬁcer should ensure that his or her force has a system for recording:

• recommendations in investigation reports

• appeal and other decisions (whether made internally or by the IPCC)

• learning published in Learning the Lessons bulletins

• internal learning from local resolution, investigations and appeals.

14.8 This system should be designed to:

• decide what to do with a recommendation

• implement it (or not) in accordance with what is decided

• monitor implementation and the impact of learning

• make adjustments to recommended policy or practice as appropriate.

Responsibilities of the local policing body

14.9 The IPCC expects the local policing body to:

• ensure that his or her force has a system for monitoring and recording

learning as outlined above

• regularly monitor whether the force is using this system appropriately

• monitor the force’s appeals activity and outcomes to satisfy him or herself

that the force’s processes are operating properly and fairly

• check the progress of his or her force in relation to recommendations it has

agreed to implement (whether from investigations or appeals, IPCC decisions

or internal decisions)

• be aware of the process in place in the force to ensure quality across all

aspects of handling complaints, conduct matters and DSI matters

• use learning from the way the force is handling complaints, conduct matters

and DSI matters to decide whether to use their powers of direction (outlined

in section 2 of this guidance).

14.10 Local policing bodies have an important role to play in ensuring that forces

understand and monitor their performance. The IPCC expects that forces will provide

it with information about what those who use their service say about the service.

Local policing bodies should ensure that they receive such information and should

use it to inform their understanding of the force’s performance on the handling of

complaints, conduct matters and DSI matters, and to identify problems or good

practice within the force.

Section 14:

DATA COLLECTION

AND MONITORING

133Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 15

14.11 Local policing bodies may also perform quality audits to provide important information

about a force’s performance. Among a number of methods that can serve the same

purpose, ﬁle sampling is one such activity that enables a local policing body to

scrutinise the performance of its force. It provides the means, through a formal

structured process, to determine the extent to which proper procedures were followed

and whether a force is dealing with matters appropriately and proportionately.

14.12 As the appropriate authority for chief ofﬁcers, local policing bodies should also

ensure that they comply with the guidance given to chief ofﬁcers in paragraphs

14.5 to 14.8.

The police complaints system performance framework

14.13 The IPCC uses a performance framework to collate data on complaints from police forces

and local policing bodies and publish regular reports. The performance framework

supports the analysis and evaluation of performance. It is used to assess performance

across the police service and to benchmark forces and levels of complaints.

14.14 The beneﬁts of the performance framework are:

• the creation of a consensus on what constitutes good performance for the

police complaints system, which is evidence based rather than intuitive

• the ability to make accurate comparisons about the performance of each

constituent part of the complaints system

• greater clarity for the police service and the IPCC about the performance that

is expected

• a reduced burden of reporting

• the ability to identify and share best practice across the system

• access to timely, relevant, consistent performance data that supports decision

making among those responsible for the complaints system

• the ability to demonstrate increased accountability to stakeholders and the

public through publication of performance data.

14.15 The IPCC makes the information collated publicly available, enabling those

responsible for the complaints system to take action in response to that

information and so improve future performance.

14.16 In order for effective monitoring and reporting to be possible it is important that

recording practice is consistent. Anyone entering police complaints data onto recording

systems should have regard to the IPCC’s guidance on recording standards, which are

available on the IPCC’s website.

Section 14:

DATA COLLECTION

AND MONITORING

134Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Abuse of the complaints system

Where there is or has been manipulation or misuse of the complaints system in

order to initiate or progress a complaint which, in all the circumstances of the

particular case, should not have been made or should not be allowed to continue.

Acting chief ofﬁcer

A person exercising or performing the functions and duties of a chief ofﬁcer

in accordance with either Sections 41, 44, 45(4) of the Police Reform and Social

Responsibility Act 2011 or Section 25 of the City of London Police Act 1839.

Adversely affected

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.

A person cannot be a complainant by claiming

to be adversely affected if he or she has only seen or heard the conduct or its

alleged effects unless:

• he or she was physically present or sufﬁciently nearby when the conduct took

place or effects occurred that he or she could see or hear the conduct or its

effects; or

• he or she was adversely affected because (or it was aggravated by the fact that)

he or she already knew the person in relation to whom the conduct took place.

Anonymous complaint

A complaint that does not disclose the complainant’s name and address, nor that

of any other interested person and it is not reasonably practicable to ascertain

such a name or address.

Appropriate authority

The appropriate authority for a person serving with the police is:

• for a chief ofﬁcer or an acting chief ofﬁcer, the local policing body for the area

of the police force of which the ofﬁcer is a member; or

• in any other case, the chief ofﬁcer with direction and control over the person

serving with the police.

Section 15:

LEGAL DEFINITIONS

Section 15:

LEGAL DEFINITIONS

Section 29, Police Reform Act 2002

Section 12, Police Reform Act 2002

Regulation 3 and 5, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

Section 29, Police Reform Act 2002

135Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Article 2

Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights provides that everyone’s life

shall be protected by law. This involves both a prohibition on the state taking life

(subject to very limited exceptions) and, in certain circumstances, a positive duty on

the state to protect life. Sometimes it will be very clear that an allegation engages a

person’s Article 2 rights – for example, where a person dies while in police detention.

In other cases, it may be less clear whether Article 2 is engaged – for example, where

the police are alleged to be aware of a threat to a person’s life and have failed to take

adequate steps to protect that life. If appropriate authorities are unsure whether a

matter engages Article 2, they should take legal advice.

Article 3

Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights provides that no one shall be

subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. It is an

absolute right – which means that torture, or inhuman or degrading treatment

is never permissible, in any circumstances. The ill treatment of the person must

reach a minimum level of severity before it can be considered as torture, inhuman or

degrading treatment or punishment. Whether the ill treatment engages Article 3 will

depend on the circumstances of the case, including the duration of the treatment, the

physical and mental effects on the victim, taking into account his or her age, gender

and state of health. If appropriate authorities are unsure whether a matter engages

Article 3, they should take legal advice.

Chief ofﬁcer

Chief ofﬁcer means the chief ofﬁcer of police of a police force.

For most police

forces this will be the Chief Constable, for the Metropolitan Police Service and

City of London Police it is the Commissioner.

Complainant refuses to co-operate

This is where the complainant refuses to co-operate to such an extent that the

relevant body considers it is not reasonably practicable to continue the investigation.

The relevant body is the IPCC where discontinuance is within its power.

The appropriate authority is the relevant body in any other case.

Conduct

Conduct includes acts, omissions, statements and decisions (whether actual,

alleged or inferred).

This may include, for example:

• language used and the manner or tone of communications;

• breach of a published code or policy

• the making of a speciﬁc decision on the deployment of ofﬁcers for a particular

investigation or operation

Section 15:

LEGAL DEFINITIONS

Section 29, Police Reform Act 2002

Regulation 10, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

Section 29, Police Reform Act 2002

136Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

• the decision to (or not to) arrest and prosecute a particular suspect for a

certain crime

• decisions about the deployment of a particular tactic on a particular occasion,

and the use of that tactic

• the application of force policies, in particular, circumstances where the

application of the policy involves an ofﬁcer exercising their discretion

• day-to-day operational decisions made in response to a particular set of

circumstances that have arisen.

Direction and control matter

A direction and control matter means a matter relating to the direction and

control of a police force by its chief ofﬁcer or a person for the time being carrying

out that chief ofﬁcer’s functions.

Disapplication

This occurs, under paragraph 7, Schedule 3 of the Police Reform Act 2002, where

an appropriate authority handles a complaint otherwise than in accordance with

Schedule 3 of the Police Reform Act 2002. The appropriate authority may handle

a complaint in whatever manner (if any) it thinks ﬁt.

Discontinuance

A discontinuance ends 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 as described at paragraphs 10.5 to 10.15.

Disciplinary proceedings

The meaning of disciplinary proceedings for the purposes of the Police Reform Act

2002 is different for members of a police force and special constables compared to

any other person serving with the police.

For a member of a police force or special constable, disciplinary proceedings

means any proceedings under the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2012.

The term ‘disciplinary proceedings’ will also include unsatisfactory performance

procedures under the Police (Performance) Regulations 2012 wherever that term

is used in section 22, section 36 and paragraphs 22, 23, 25 and 27, Schedule 3,

Police Reform Act 2002.

For any other person serving with the police, disciplinary proceedings means any

proceedings or management process during which that person’s conduct, rather

than their performance, is considered for the purposes of deciding whether any

sanction or punitive measure should be imposed against them for that conduct.

The term ‘disciplinary proceedings’ will also include any proceedings or

management process during which that person’s performance is considered to

determine whether it is satisfactory and whether any action should be taken in

relation to it wherever that term is used in section 22 and paragraphs 22, 23, 25

and 27, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002.

Section 15:

LEGAL DEFINITIONS

Paragraph 29, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Paragraph 7, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Section 29, Police Reform Act 2002; Regulation 1, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

Regulation 3, Police (Conduct) Regulations 2012 and Regulation 4, Police (Performance) Regulations 2012

137Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

European Convention on Human Rights

This means the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental

Freedoms agreed by the Council of Europe at Rome on 4 November 1950.

Fanciful complaints

A complaint is fanciful if no reasonable person could lend any credence to it.

It is an objective test.

Independent investigation

An investigation carried out by the IPCC itself.

An independent investigation is often used for the most serious incidents and/or

those with the greatest public interest. For example, those that cause the greatest

level of public concern, have the greatest potential to impact on communities, or

have serious implications for the reputation of the police service.

Interested person

Someone who has an interest in being kept properly informed about the handling

of a complaint, recordable conduct matter or DSI matter. An interested person is

not a complainant.

In the case of a complaint or recordable conduct matter, a person will have

an interest in being kept properly informed if it appears to the IPCC or to an

appropriate authority that the person:

• is a relative of the person whose death is alleged to be the result of the conduct

complained of or to which the recordable conduct relates;

• is a relative of the person whose serious injury is alleged to be the result of the

conduct complained of or to which the recordable conduct relates and that

person cannot make a complaint; or

• is a person who has suffered serious injury that is alleged to be the result of the

conduct complained of or to which the recordable conduct relates.

In the case of a DSI matter, a person will have an interest in being kept properly

informed if it appears to the IPCC or to an appropriate authority that the person:

• is a relative of the person who has died;

• is a relative of the person who suffered serious injury and that person cannot

make a complaint; or

• is the person who has suffered serious injury.

A relative is deﬁned as any spouse, partner, parent or adult child.

A person who does not fall into any of the categories above may still be an interested

person if the IPCC or the appropriate authority considers that person has an interest

in the handling of the complaint, conduct matter or DSI matter that is sufﬁcient to

make it appropriate for information to be provided to him in accordance with this

section. For example, this may include coroners.

Section 15:

LEGAL DEFINITIONS

Regulation 3, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

Paragraph 19, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Section 21, Police Reform Act 2002

Regulation 14, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

138Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

A person may only be treated as an interested person under the Police Reform Act

if he or she has consented to information being provided to him or her.

Local policing body

This is a collective term for:

• police and crime commissioners

• the Mayor’s Ofﬁce for Policing and Crime (in relation to the Metropolitan

Police district)

• the Common Council (in relation to the City of London Police police area).

Local investigation

An investigation carried out by the appropriate authority on its own behalf.

Managed investigation

An investigation conducted by the appropriate authority under the direction

and control of the IPCC.

The IPCC manages the investigation in terms of its scope, investigative strategy

and ﬁndings of the report.

Tasks such as completing the policy log and writing the ﬁnal report will be carried

out by the police investigator under the IPCC’s direction. The IPCC’s manager will

review policy books and the IPCC will conﬁrm the investigation has met the terms

of reference.

Mandatory referral

A complaint, conduct matter or DSI matter that must be referred to the IPCC.

Matter which is already the subject of a complaint relating to the same subject matter

and made by or on behalf of the same complainant

A matter is considered to be already the subject of a complaint where a complaint

is made against the same person serving with the police originally complained of,

relating to the same subject and by the same complainant.

Misconduct proceedings

For a member of a police force or a special constable, misconduct proceedings

means a misconduct meeting or a misconduct hearing.

For a person serving with the police who is not a member of a police force or a special

constable, misconduct proceedings means any proceedings or management process

during which the conduct (as opposed to the performance) of such a person is

considered in order to determine whether a sanction or punitive measure is to

be imposed against him or her in relation to that conduct.

Section 15:

LEGAL DEFINITIONS

Section 21, Police Reform Act 2002

Section 101, Police Act 1996

Paragraph 16, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Paragraph 18, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Regulation 1, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

139Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Not reasonably practicable to complete the investigation of the complaint or any other

procedures under Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

For the purposes of the disapplication grounds, it is not reasonably practicable to

investigate a complaint or any other procedures under Schedule 3, Police Reform

Act 2002 where:

• it is not reasonably practicable to communicate with the complainant

or person acting on his or her behalf; or

• it is not reasonably practicable to complete a satisfactory

investigation because:

i. the complainant is refusing or failing to make a statement or provide other

reasonable assistance for the purposes of the investigation; or

ii. of the lapse of time since the event(s) complained about.

Not being reasonably practicable includes action that it is not reasonably

practicable to take within a period that is reasonable in all the circumstances

of the case.

Oppressive complaint

A complaint which is without foundation that is intended, or likely to result in

burdensome, harsh or wrongful treatment of the person complained against.

Person concerned

Person concerned means:

• in the case of an investigation of a complaint, the person in respect of whom

there is an indication that he or she may have committed a criminal offence or

behaved in a manner that would justify the bringing of disciplinary proceedings

• in the case of an investigation of a recordable conduct matter, the person to

whose conduct the investigation relates.

Person serving with the police

This includes:

• a member of a police force

• a civilian employee of a police force (referred to in this guidance as a police

staff member)

• an employee of the Common Council of the City of London who is under the

direction and control of a chief ofﬁcer

• a special constable who is under the direction and control of a chief ofﬁcer.

Section 15:

LEGAL DEFINITIONS

Regulation 5, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

Section 12, Police Reform Act 2002

140Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Recording

Recording a complaint, conduct matter or DSI matter gives it formal status under

the Police Reform Act 2002.

Repetitious complaint

A repetitious complaint is one that:

• concerns substantially the same conduct as a previous conduct matter or is

substantially the same as a previous complaint made by or on behalf of the

same complainant;

• contains no new allegations that signiﬁcantly affect the account of the conduct

complained of; and

• no new evidence (that was not reasonably available at the time the previous

complaint was made) is provided to support the complaint.

However, one or more of the following conditions must also be met in relation to

the previous complaint or conduct matter for the new complaint to be repetitious:

• the complaint was locally resolved;

• the requirements of Schedule 3 of the Police Reform Act 2002 were disapplied

or dispensed with in respect of the complaint;

• the IPCC ordered the discontinuance of the investigation of the complaint and

gave the appropriate authority a direction to disapply or dispense;

• the appropriate authority disapplied the requirements of Schedule 3 of the

Police Reform Act 2002 when it discontinued an investigation (where the

discontinuance was not within the IPCC’s power);

• the complaint was withdrawn; or

• the appropriate authority either submitted a memorandum to the IPCC setting

out its determinations following a managed or independent investigation, or

made the determinations following a local or supervised investigation.

Repetitious conduct matter

A repetitious conduct matter is one that:

• concerns substantially the same conduct as a previous complaint or

conduct matter;

• there is no fresh indication in respect of that matter that a person serving

with the police may have committed a criminal offence or behaved in a

manner that would justify the bringing of disciplinary proceedings; and

• there is no fresh evidence in respect of that matter that was not reasonably

available at the time the previous complaint was made or the previous conduct

matter was recorded.

However, one or more of the following conditions must also be met in relation

to the previous complaint or conduct matter for the new conduct matter to

be repetitious:

• the complaint was locally resolved;

Section 15:

LEGAL DEFINITIONS

Regulation 3, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

141Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

• the requirements of Schedule 3 of the Police Reform Act 2002 were disapplied

or dispensed with in respect of the complaint;

• the IPCC ordered the discontinuance of the investigation of the complaint and

gave the appropriate authority a direction to disapply or dispense;

• the appropriate authority disapplied the requirements of Schedule 3 of the

Police Reform Act 2002 following the discontinuance of an investigation (where

the discontinuance was not within the IPCC’s power);

• the complaint was withdrawn and it does not fall to be treated as a recordable

conduct matter; or

• the appropriate authority either submitted a memorandum to the IPCC setting

out its determinations following a managed or independent investigation or

made the determinations following a local or supervised investigation.

Senior ofﬁcer

A member of a police force holding a rank above chief superintendent.

Serious injury

A fracture, deep cut, deep laceration or injury causing damage to an internal

organ or the impairment of any bodily function.

Severity assessment

An assessment as to:

• whether the conduct, if proved, would amount to misconduct or gross

misconduct; and

• if the conduct were to become the subject of disciplinary proceedings, the

form that those proceedings would be likely to take.

Special requirements

Special requirements apply only to investigations of complaints against a member

of a police force or a special constable. In the case of any other person, the investigator

must adhere to the relevant policies and procedures for investigating allegations of any

form of misconduct.

If, at any time during an investigation of a complaint, it appears to the investigator

that there is an indication that a person to whose conduct the investigation

relates may have:

• committed a criminal offence; or

• behaved in a manner that would justify the bringing of disciplinary proceedings

then the investigator must certify the investigation as one subject to special

requirements.

Throughout the investigation, the investigator must consider

whether such an indication exists even if he or she initially decided it did not.

Section 15:

LEGAL DEFINITIONS

Regulation 7, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

Regulation 1, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

Section 29, Police Reform Act 2002

Paragraph 19B, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

142Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance - May 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Section 15:

LEGAL DEFINITIONS

Supervised investigation

An investigation carried out by the appropriate authority under the

IPCC’s supervision.

The IPCC will also agree the terms of reference and investigation plan.

The investigator must satisfy any requirements imposed by the IPCC that

appear to the IPCC to be reasonable and necessary.

Unsatisfactory Performance Procedures

(UPP) Means the procedures set out in the Police (Performance)

Regulations 2012.

Unsatisfactory performance or attendance

Unsatisfactory performance or attendance means an inability or failure of a police

ofﬁcer to perform the duties of the role or rank he or she is currently undertaking

to a satisfactory standard or level.

Vexatious complaint

A complaint that is without foundation, which is intended, or tends, to vex, worry,

annoy or embarrass.

Voluntary referral

A complaint or recordable conduct matter that is not required to be referred

to the IPCC, but where the gravity of the subject matter or any exceptional

circumstances justiﬁes referral.

Withdrawn complaints

A complaint that is withdrawn in accordance with regulation 21, Police

(Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012 following an indication

or notiﬁcation from the complainant.

Witnessed the conduct

For the purposes of making a complaint under the Police Reform Act 2002, a person

can only be said to have ‘witnessed the conduct’ (and thus be able to be a complainant)

if he or she acquired his or her knowledge of that conduct in a manner that would

make him or her a competent witness capable of giving admissible evidence of that

conduct in criminal proceedings or has in his or her possession or control anything that

would be admissible evidence in criminal proceedings of the conduct.

Paragraph 17, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Paragraph 17, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002 and Regulation 9, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

Regulation 4, Police (Performance) Regulations 2012

Paragraphs 4 and 13, Schedule 3, Police Reform Act 2002

Regulation 21, Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012

Section 12, Police Reform Act 2002

90 High Holborn

London

WC1V 6BH

Web: www.ipcc.gov.uk

Tel: 0300 020 0096

Email: enquiries@ipcc.gsi.gov.uk

This document contains public sector information

licensed under the Open Government Licence v1.0.

It represents the IPCC’s interpretation of the law.

May 2015

Reference POL/42

Independent Police Complaints Commission

Published by the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC).

Download
Save PDF to desktop

Email
Email completed PDF

Send for Signing
Email for others to sign

Print
Print document

NAME

2015 Statutory Guidance English

View Audit Log
Print With Audit Log
Duplicate Document

Fillable 2015 Statutory Guidance English

Fill Online, Printable, Fillable, Blank 2015 Statutory Guidance English Form

First 20 documents completely FREE!