Dip sampling of closed complaints and conduct matters

Report: 5
Date: 7 March 2011
By: Chief Executive

Summary

To update the Professional Standards Cases Sub-Committee (“the PSCSC”) on matters pertaining to the dip sampling of files.

A. Recommendations

That members

1. note the contents of this report.

B. Supporting information

Review of files dip sampled in November 2010

1. Following a review of a batch of closed complaint files in November 2010, the Chair of the PSCSC together with officers of the Authority and the Directorate of Professional Standards (“DPS”) met to discuss the findings of that review. One such finding was the inappropriate comment made by an officer regarding a complainant. It was agreed at that meeting that DPS would have a meeting with the officer concerned.

2. That meeting has now taken place (see Appendix 1 - Exempt).

Association of Police Authorities’ guidance on dip sampling

3. Members have requested clarity on the comments that they make during the dip sampling process, in particular to what extent they can disagree with determinations themselves, for example, if they consider there has been an error in the decision, or they consider it is unbalanced, unfair or disproportionate.

4. The Guidance from the Association of Police Authorities (APA) on “Oversight and Scrutiny of professional standards matters: the role of police authorities” is enclosed at Appendix 2. The APA guidance on review of complaints files at page 12 of this document states that:

“the aim of this exercise is to determine, through a structured process, whether or not proper procedures are being followed and an appropriate approach is taken to complaints and misconduct. While this includes consideration of managerial decision making – for example, in whether or not cases are suitable for local resolution – police authorities should not seek to review the conclusion reached in individual cases. This activity may also identify learning and other issues for discussion with the force.”

Dip sampling of files in February 2011

5. Members are currently reviewing closed complaint files for February 2011. It is anticipated that the findings will be presented to the Sub-Committee in April.

C. Other organisational and community implications

Equality and Diversity Impact

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

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 Metropolitan Police Service.
•  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 serving with its force.

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

• Appendix 1: Letter dated 19 February 2011 from Chief Inspector Glenn Tunstall (Exempt).
• Appendix 2: Guidance from the Association of Police Authorities.

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