Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Exhibit a 7


Published on

Supporting document (Exhibit A-7) to Appellant’s notice of appeal against a Decision Notice issued by the Information Commissioner, in accordance with rule 22 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009. Concerns requests for information made to Humberside police to obtain the number of times the phrase "YOU CANT MAKE ME" appeared in police officers witness statements. Humberside Police relied on section 14(1) (vexatious requests) of FOIA.

Published in: Law
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Exhibit a 7

  2. 2. • I independent Our reference number: 2017/082079 3; Se. Dt 29 August 2017 Dear rv annibynnol PO Box 473 Sale M33 oBW Blwch Post 473 Sale M33 oBW TellFf6n: 0300 020 0°96 Fax/Ffacs: 0207 166 3306 Text relay/Cyfnewid Testun: 18001 0207166 3000 EmaiI/E-bost: Web/Gwefan: This letter is about your appeal against Humberside Police which was received by the police on 22nd April 2017 and subsequently forwarded to the IPee for consideration. The IPee's role, in this case, is to review whether the outcome of the local resolution was a proper outcome. The IPee have not investigated your original complaint. Our legal duties are set out in paragraph 8A of Schedule 3 of the Police Reform Act 20021. As part of the review we looked at: • whether your complaint was suitable for local resolution; • the representations you gave as part of your appeal saying why the outcome was not a proper outcome; • whether an action plan was drawn up with your involvement and agreement setting out the steps to be taken to resolve your complaint; • whether you were given the opportunity to comment on the complaint during the process; • whether any reason you were given was clear and detailed enough to deal with your concerns; • whether an apology would have been appropriate, if no apology was given as part of the outcome; • whether any learning was identified, or should have been identified. After considering all the information available I have decided to UPHOLD your appeal because I am not satisfied the substance of your complaint is suitable for local resolution. As stipulated in Paragraph 6, Schedule 3 of the Police Reform Act 2002 a complaint must meet both of the following conditions to be suitable for Local Resolution: 1 This changes to regulation 28 of the Contractor Regulations 2015 if your complaint was made on or after 8 April 2015 and relates to a contractor working for the police. 1
  3. 3. • 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 complaint 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. Whilst your complaint does not appear to meet the conditions given above, I understand that Humberside Police have cited the article in the IPCC publication FOCUS, Issue 3, concerning complaints that fall outside of the aforementioned criteria, but where 'exaggerated language' is used, and can still be locally resolved. However examples of exaggerated language are where the complainant may be alleging offences such as perjury or perverting the course of justice, but the substance of the allegation centres on challenging the decision or action taken by the police. In your case the substance of your complaint is that PC Slake is alleged to have pursued a deliberate course of action to affect the course of justice; by encouraging a witness to provide a false statement and that your arrest was unlawful. It is my view that if either allegation was proven it would amount to the offences alleged and as such are not suitable for Local Resolution. As a result of this appeal review I will be directing Humberside Police to carry out an investigation into your complaint. I note from your original appeal documentation, dated 22 April 2017 and further representations, dated 13 July 2017, that you appear to provide both further information in support of your complaint and potentially new complaints such as collusion between the police and the CPS/Courts concerning the lack of securing CCTV and rights to legal representation etc. In the circumstances, and as part of my direction to investigate your complaint, I will recommend the person appointed to investigate your complaint [this has to be a person who hasn't participated in attempting Local Resolution} reviews both sets of your appeal correspondence before finalising with you details of your complaint and what the investigation will consider. Whilst Humberside Police already have on file the appeal you submitted on 22 April 2017, I will provide a copy of the additional documentation, dated 13th July 2017, to Humberside Police for consideration; a copy of which is attached to this decision letter for your information. Furthermore, in addition to the complaint not meeting the conditions for Local Resolution there is insufficient evidence to suggest that, even if your complaint had met the threshold test, a proper outcome was reached in this case. 2
  4. 4. Regulation 6 of the Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012 states that the person appointed to deal with a complaint must provide both the complainant, and person/s complained against, an opportunity to comment on the complaint. However there appears to be no evidence of any dialogue between you and Humberside Police, nor an action plan or details of what steps would be taken by the 10 to resolve the complaint. Although I have decided your complaint should be investigated, I will still provide feedback to Humberside Police about the lack of communication with you and the importance of giving all complainants an opportunity to feed into the Local Resolution process, so learning can be taken from this case. You should now expect Humberside Police to contact you about the actions that I have asked them to take. If you have not heard from them in 28 days please contact them directly for an update and to determine who the appointed Investigating Office will be. Please be aware you are not able to appeal my decision. However, if you have any questions or need more information about my decision please contact me. My details are at the end of this letter. On a separate note it appears you may also have complaints concerning both the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and the Court. As the IPCC has no jurisdiction over these two formal bodies, please make your complaints directly to them. Lastly please be aware that if you have posted any paperwork to the IPCC, they will have been electronically copied and the original papers will be securely destroyed in accordance with the IPCC destruction policy. If you would like to have your original papers returned to you, you must notify the IPCC within 21 days of the date of this letter. Your papers will then be returned by standard delivery post. Yours sincerely ~ Anne Farr (Mrs) Casework Manager Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) PO Box 473 Sale M330BW Tel: 020 7166 3228 Fax: 020 71663621 E-mail: Find the IPCC's guidance on handling complaints here: guidance Enc. Copies of the appeal documentation, dated 13 July 2017 & Local Resolution FAQ Sheet. 3