• Filter by:
  • Search:

Reviews


The Police Investigations & Review Commissioner carries out independent review of the way in which police bodies operating in Scotland deal with complaints made by members of the public.

The Commissioner often publishes reports, known as Complaint Handling Reviews, in anonymised form. This is to provide assurance to the public that there is robust and independent oversight of police complaints handling in Scotland. On occasion a press release to highlight in the media an issue arising from a CHR may be issued, these can be found in the press centre.

Here you will find Complaint Handling Reviews published by the Commissioner.  All reviews are completely anonymised prior to publication. 

Click here to access reviews carried out under the Police Complaints Commissioner for Scotland.

  • Title:
    Report - Police Scotland
    Reference:
    PIRC/00049/17
    Police Body:
    Reports, Police Scotland
    Date:
    18 September 2017
    Download:
    Download Report - Police Scotland
    049.17 The complaint in this case arose from the applicant being charged with a driving offence. A single complaint was considered, namely: That two plain-clothes police officers exited their unmarked police car and ran towards the applicant's car whilst he waited at traffic lights. The review found that the complaint was not handled to a reasonable standard. A direction for reconsideration was issued in this connection.
  • Title:
    Reports, Police Scotland
    Reference:
    PIRC/00048/17
    Police Body:
    Reports, Police Scotland
    Date:
    18 September 2017
    Download:
    Download Reports, Police Scotland
    048.17 The complaints in this case arose after the applicant reported two incidents to Police Scotland. Two complaints were reviewed, namely: 1. that while speaking to a witness following an incident in October 2013, a police officer failed to ask appropriate questions to establish whether a child witness was telling the truth; and 2. that while speaking to a second witness following an incident in November 2013, a police officer failed to ask appropriate questions to establish whether a child witness was telling the truth. The review found that both complaints were handled to a reasonable standard. No recommendations have been made.
  • Title:
    Report - Police Scotland
    Reference:
    PIRC/00071/17
    Police Body:
    Reports, Police Scotland
    Date:
    11 September 2017
    Download:
    Download Report - Police Scotland
    071.17 The complaints in this case arose from an incident that resulted in the applicant being arrested and her car being seized and subsequently disposed of. Two complaints were raised, namely: 1. that officers failed to return an asthma inhaler to the applicant upon her release from custody; and; 2. that the applicant was not provided with a sufficient explanation of the incident involving her vehicle and the events leading to its disposal. The review found that both complaints were handled to a reasonable standard. No recommendations were made but a learning point was identified.
  • Title:
    Report - Police Scotland
    Reference:
    PIRC/00108/17
    Police Body:
    Reports, Police Scotland
    Date:
    11 September 2017
    Download:
    Download Report - Police Scotland
    108.17 The complaints in this case arose from an altercation between the applicant and a bus driver. Four complaints were considered, namely: 1. That Police Scotland took too long to investigate a crime reported by the applicant; 2. That the investigating officer did not provide the applicant with sufficient updates; 3. That the applicant was told that all CCTV relevant to the crime he reported had been collected, however this was not the case; and 4. That Police Scotland did not report a breach of Road Traffic legislation to the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service within the required timescale. The review found that all four complaints were handled to a reasonable standard. It was however considered necessary to make a single recommendation.
  • Title:
    Report - Police Scotland
    Reference:
    PIRC/00009/17
    Police Body:
    Date:
    5 September 2017
    Download:
    Download Report - Police Scotland
    009.17 The applicant's complaints relate to the police handling of an ongoing dispute between the applicant and his neighbours. Four complaints were reviewed, namely: 1. that officers came to the applicant's home at midnight and spoke with his wife rather than him; 2. that a sergeant promised to update the applicant on the possibility of mediation but did not so, despite the applicant trying to contact him on a number of occasions; 3. that officers attended at the applicant's home when neither he nor his wife were there and spoke outside to his son, who has autism; and 4. that an officer left a telephone message regarding the applicant being reported to the Procurator Fiscal when this should have been done face-to-face. The review found that three complaints were handled to a reasonable standard whilst one was not. One recommendation was made.
  • Title:
    Report - Police Scotland
    Reference:
    PIRC/00047/17
    Police Body:
    Reports, Police Scotland
    Date:
    5 September 2017
    Download:
    Download Report - Police Scotland
    047.17 The complaints in this case arose from the applicant telephoning Police Scotland's Service Centre. Two complaints were considered, namely: 1. that Service Centre Advisors gave the applicant's daughter more information about his wife's welfare than they gave to him; and 2. that a Service Centre Advisor gave the applicant incorrect information about his wife's welfare. It was found that neither complaint was handled to a reasonable standard. Two recommendations and a learning point were issued in this connection.
  • Title:
    Report - Police Scotland
    Reference:
    PIRC/00074/17
    Police Body:
    Reports, Police Scotland
    Date:
    5 September 2017
    Download:
    Download Report - Police Scotland
    074.17 The complaints in this case arose from a police enquiry into the theft of the applicant's scaffolding. Eight complaints were reviewed, namely: 1. That on 5 July 2016 the applicant received conflicting advice from officers at two different police stations; 2. That on 5 July 2016 the applicant was informed by an officer at a named police office that he would be arrested if he removed the scaffolding; 3. That between 5 July 2017 and 28 October 2017, officers took an excessive amount of time to investigate the alleged theft; 4. That between 5 July 2016 and 28 October 2016, an officer failed to keep the applicant up to date with the progress of the enquiry; 5. That between 13 July 2016 and 29 September 2016, officers took an excessive amount of time to send a sample of the scaffolding for forensic analysis; 6. That throughout the enquiry, officers failed to make enquiries with Gumtree as quickly or as thoroughly as expected; 7. That an officer from the Professional Standards Department closed down his complaint without his approval; 8. That officer believed the story of the new owner of the scaffolding when he alleged that it had been stolen. The review found that five of the complaints were handled to a reasonable standard and three were not. Four recommendations have been made.
  • Title:
    Report - Police Scotland
    Reference:
    PIRC/00077/17
    Police Body:
    Reports, Police Scotland
    Date:
    5 September 2017
    Download:
    Download Report - Police Scotland
    077.17 The complaints in this case arose from police officers having attended at the applicants home in relation to an on-going neighbour dispute. Four complaints were reviewed, namely: 1. that Constable A set out to humiliate and intimidate the applicant and did not allow her to explain her position; 2. that Constable A was under the influence of illegal drugs when he entered the applicants home; 3. that Constable B threatened the applicant with arrest unnecessarily; and 4. that Constable A and Constable B refused to leave the applicants home when asked to do so. Of the four complaints considered, it was found that two were handled to a reasonable standard while two were not. Two recommendations have been made in this connection.
  • Title:
    Reports - Police Scotland
    Reference:
    PIRC/00076/17
    Police Body:
    Reports, Police Scotland
    Date:
    28 August 2017
    Download:
    Download Reports - Police Scotland
    076.17 The complaints in this case arose from the applicant being issued a Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty Notice for causing an "unnecessary obstruction". Four complaints were considered, namely: 1. that an officer lost his temper and failed to deal with a situation appropriately; 2. that the officers refused to accept an explanation for the offence from the applicant; 3. that the officers failed to accurately record the situation; and 4. that the officers misrepresented the facts of the case to the Court. The review found that three complaints were handled to a reasonable standard while the remaining complaint was not. A single recommendation was made in this connection. A learning point was also issued.
  • Title:
    Reports - Police Scotland
    Reference:
    PIRC/00105/17
    Police Body:
    Date:
    28 August 2017
    Download:
    Download Reports - Police Scotland
    105.17 The complaints in this case arose from the police action taken in relation to an incident the applicant reported. Three complaints were reviewed, namely: 1. that the officer who attended the reported incident on 9 July 2016 failed to take the matter seriously and investigate the circumstances as a crime as the applicant reported it; 2. that one of the officers made a sarcastic and uncivil comment towards the applicant with body posture to match; and 3. that officers demonstrated a lack of awareness of the rights of citizens/members of the public to take photographs. Of the three complaints considered, it was found that none were dealt with to a reasonable standard. Three recommendations were made.