Posted: Monday 15 May 2017

Commissioner recommends police provide more information over decision not to bring criminal charges in alleged forged signature case


The Police Investigations & Review Commissioner (PIRC) has recommended that Police Scotland should provide more information to a man explaining their decision not to bring a criminal case after they investigated claims his signature had been forged and money withdrawn from his bank account without permission.  

The man complained to police over the way they handled the investigation and a Complaint Handling Review (CHR) found that none of his complaints were dealt with to a reasonable standard.

In 496.16, the PIRC were asked to review 3 complaints. The man complained Police Scotland failed to establish the difference between his signature and the one on the withdrawal slip. He also said that witnesses he named were not interviewed by the police and that misleading evidence was submitted to the Lord Advocate.

The Review recommended that in relation to the examination of signatures, the complainer should be provided with Police Scotland's reasons for concluding there was no criminality. He should also be informed which witnesses had been interviewed and where one or more had not been, an explanation should be provided as to why not.  

It was also recommended that Police Scotland should obtain a further statement from the complainer to establish why he believes "the Lord Advocate has been misled".

In a separate CHR, 593.16, the complaints arose from a police investigation into the applicant's allegation of assault.

Two complaints were reviewed. The first was that the investigating officer did not fully investigate the applicant's complaint of assault which led to the suspect not being charged and the second was that on the applicant's visit to a police office on 20 September 2016, he felt that the officer he spoke with was rude and discourteous and tried to dissuade him from making a complaint.

The review found that the first complaint was dealt with to a reasonable standard and the second was not. One recommendation was made.   

<  Return to news