Update on dip sampling of closed complaints and conduct matters

Report: 4
Date: 20 December 2010
By: Chief Executive

Summary

To report on the dip sampling of closed complaints’ files undertaken by Members of the Authority in November 2010.

A. Recommendations

That members

1. note and discuss the contents of this report.
2. Determine the criterion/criteria for the selection of the next batch of closed complaints’ files.
3. Agree to the further amendments to the draft checklist, as suggested by Members.

B. Supporting information

Findings of the Dip Sampling process in November 2010

1. In accordance with the Protocol on Dip Sampling (Exempt - Appendix 1), a random sample of 10 files was initially selected which Members of the Professional Standards Cases Sub-Committee reviewed in November 2010. Members restricted their review to the criteria set out in Exempt - Appendix 2.

2. Generally, Members have been positive in their review of these files which would indicate that most of the criteria against which they assessed the files were satisfied. In particular, they considered that complaints were being handled in a timely manner and that issues were being addressed appropriately.

3. Two issues were however identified which will be discussed with the Directorate of Professional standards of the Metropolitan Police Service (“DPS”) and which will be fed back to Members at the meeting on 20 December 2010. These issues are:

• Lack of proper file management. Attendance notes appeared to be missing which made it difficult for Members to make a proper assessment of the files; and
• Inappropriate language used in an e-mail correspondence, referring to the mental state of the complainant.

4. Members’ also made some comments about the draft checklist, as set out below:

• It would be helpful to have an “Any other comments” box; and
• The draft checklist should bear the file reference number.

Files to be reviewed in February 2011

5. Paragraph 1.2 of the Protocol provides that the Authority will review annually 1% of closed complaints’ files and at least 5% of files pertaining to direction and control matters (paragraph 1.3).

6. Paragraph 4.4 of the Protocol outlines the criteria that Members will have regard to, in selecting the files to be reviewed.

7. To assist Members in selecting the next batch of files, the following documents are in Exempt Appendix 3:

• A list of complaint categories, as obtained from the Independent Police Complaints Commission Statutory Guidance.
• Report dated 11 November 2010 from DPS (the appendices have been excluded). Members are in particular referred to paragraph 3.

8. Members may also consider from which borough these files should be obtained (Exempt - Appendix 4).

C. Other organisational and community implications

Equality and Diversity Impact

1. There are no direct equality and diversity issues arising from this report.

Consideration of Met Forward

2. The content of this report has the potential to impact adversely on the following strands of Met Forward:

• Met Connect – confidence in the MPS.
• Met Standards – holding the Commissioner to account.

Financial Implications

3. There are no immediate financial implications arising from this report.

Legal Implications

4. Section 15 of the Police Reform Act 2002 requires the Authority to ensure that it is kept informed about complaints made against police officers.

Environmental Implications

5. There are no environmental implications arising from this report.

Risk Implications

6. There are no risk implications arising from this report.

D. Background papers

Exempt appendices

• Appendix 1: Amended Protocol on Dip Sampling
• Appendix 2: Draft checklist
• Appendix 3: Complaint categories and report dated 11 November 2010 from DPS
• Appendix 4: List of boroughs

E. Contact details

Report authors: Kalyanee Mendelsohn, MPA.

For more information contact:

MPA general: 020 7202 0202
Media enquiries: 020 7202 0217/18

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback