Complaints & Conduct-the long read

The police complaints system exists to maintain public confidence & service the requirements of the Human Rights Act 1998, the complaints system must be robust & capable of apportioning blame.

The unique role of the police, not least the imposition of detention & search powers or the taking of somebody’s liberty expose officers to grievances & complaints of a volume & severity, such that it can be likened to no other profession. The inevitability of you receiving complaints which are vexatious, malicious or outright dishonest is a necessary & unavoidable result of the need to maintain confidence in the police via the complaints system; else those born of misunderstanding or which are true would go unheard.

The Police Federation train representatives in the role defined in the various regulations which follow as ‘Police Friend’. To assist & advise a fellow officer through the often distressing and sometimes inordinately lengthy investigative process is one of the most important & challenging functions we perform. To that end you should seek early advice from your Federation Representative as appropriate.

  • Duty Statements

You cannot be lawfully ordered to provide a statement about matters for which you are being investigated or may be investigated (common sense applies) for criminal or misconduct matters.

There is a balance to be struck between your duties as the holder of the office of Constable & your inalienable legal right against self-incrimination.

If in doubt reserve your position until you have sought advice from a federation friend or lawyer.

If placed in the invidious position of being ordered to provide a statement before receiving advice, you may decide to limit your statement to the time you were on & off duty, together with the fact that you were involved in an incident for which you are now seeking advice.

  • Regulation Notice

The majority of regulation notices are for public complaints & you may receive an initial email notification that a public complaint has been made. A much smaller proportion derive from internal reports of potential misconduct from colleagues-it is of course the duty of us all to challenge, report or take action.

If notifying you of the complaint or internal misconduct would prejudice that or another investigation, it will be proper to delay service until such time as prejudice is avoided.

The notice will inform you;

  • Whether the investigation is Criminal & Misconduct or Misconduct only
  • Behaviour complained of
  • Standard(s) of Professional Behaviour engaged
  • Whether assessed as Misconduct or Gross Misconduct (if admitted or proven as alleged)
  • The investigator

The severity assessment (Misconduct or Gross Misconduct) is not an assessment of the strength of evidence & could change during or at the conclusion of the investigation.

You will note that you have 10 (working) days to respond to the allegation or provide relevant documents. This is particularly pertinent to any lines of inquiry, which if you do not alert the investigating officer to would lead to evidence being lost. If that were to happen & you sought to rely on the (lost) evidence in your defence, you could properly expect an adverse inference to be drawn at any later meeting or hearing.

You need to promptly provide a copy of this notice to your federation representative to assist in advising you.

Severity Assessment

In every case where a notice is to be served an initial assessment is carried out by the appointed investigator & agreed with their DCI. That severity assessment is open to review & where appropriate should be reviewed during the investigation dependent upon the evidence.

Misconduct

If your notice shows misconduct, it means the initial assessment is that it does not warrant the ultimate sanction of dismissal if admitted or proven as alleged.

Gross Misconduct

If your notice shows gross misconduct, it means the initial assessment is that it does warrant the ultimate sanction of dismissal if admitted or proven as alleged.

  • Restriction or Suspension

Regulation 10 of The Police Conduct Regulations 2012 sets out where suspension or restriction should be considered. This is a case specific consideration to deal with associated risks to the investigation and so to the reputation of the police. If the decision is made to restrict or suspend you, that decision will be reviewed every 28 days.

In the rare event you are suspended you must hand in your warrant card & cease to hold the office of constable until such time as any suspension is lifted. While suspended you will retain your pay (but may not claim expenses-see preparing your defence below) & remain subject to the Standards of Professional Behaviour.

In addition you must (via your welfare officer if suspended) apply for leave in the normal manner.

Any restriction conditions or suspension should be treated as a lawful order.

  • Preparing your Defence

While investigated for misconduct you (& your federation representative) will be afforded time out of normal duties to obtain advice, receive disclosure, make representations & attend interviews etc. References;

  • Regulation 6 of the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2012
  • Home Office Guidance (Revised November 2017) Introduction, 2.168

If you are suspended you may not claim expenses until such time as you are re-instated. You will also not be attending (from) the workplace, nor be directly supervised. Mileage & expenses (reasonable & receipted) should be collated in anticipation of later re-instatement, as such it would be advisable to keep your appointed welfare officer informed & keep records. Reference;

  • The Police Regulations 2003-SCHEDULE 2 Regulation 24 Regulation 27 ANNEX UWritten Questions or Recorded Interview(s)Legal Advice
  • Written Questions or Recorded Interview(s)

The investigating officer is entitled to carry out a ‘proportionate investigation’. Where the investigator decides it is proportionate to ask questions on paper, it is generally preferable to respond in writing. Your federation representative can assist by proof reading that response to seek to provide sufficient focus, detail & clarity, so avoiding potential ambiguity at the first submission. It is a benefit to all to avoid time spent travelling to recorded interview if avoidable.

If you are required to attend for recorded interview, you may be accompanied by your federation representative.

Disclosure

The extent of the disclosure provided is a matter for the appointed investigator & is to the criminal standard (HOG 2.186). You must be allowed sufficient time upon receipt to read the material & prepare for interview (HOG 2.168).

  • Legal Advice

Criminal Investigation

Officers are entitled to legal advice & a solicitor to represent them in interview for any & all criminal investigations-as any member of the public would be-for a PACE 9 or PACE 12 interview.

Misconduct Investigation

You are entitled to a federation representative to represent you in interview, but you are not entitled to representation by a solicitor during interview. Officers are entitled to legal advice & representation when sent to a Misconduct Hearing. The application for legal is normally made when the decision is made to send you to a Misconduct Hearing, or for a complex matter your federation representative may seek early legal advice.

Legal Claim (Form C2)

When directed by your federation representative fill in sections A, B & F only-with a dated wet signature, before submitting it to your federation representative with your regulation notice.

The Claims Department may decline a claim in the following circumstances;

On Duty

It is within the knowledge of all that the conduct alleged is never permissible, i.e. accessing police systems for a none-police purpose.

The conduct alleged is not for a policing purpose, i.e. pursuing a personal relationship

Off Duty

The conduct alleged is irrelevant to you holding the office of constable.

Group Insurance Scheme

If you are a member of the group insurance scheme which includes legal, the parameters for cover are broader & may provide for instances when a claim would otherwise fail. Contact the Federation office to discuss a claim.

The policy details are in ‘Save Money’

  • Misconduct Meeting

A decision that you will attend a Misconduct Meeting means your job is not in jeopardy. The Meeting is heard by 1 person, previously your operational commander, or an operational commander from the district or department concerned, from June 2018 a Chief Inspector without a direct interest. A Meeting is held in private, but may be attended by the IPCC & the complainant as appropriate. The file is disclosed no more than 20 working days in advance, giving you & your federation representative time to make decisions & formally respond. Key decisions to be made are;

Is the breach(es) of the Standards of Professional Behaviour accepted, if not;

  • What, if any witnesses are to be requested.
  • What case law you consider relevant for consideration by the Chair
  • What if any additional papers may be referred to

The case against you will be presented by the Professional Standards Department. You are entitled to be represented by your federation representative who may wish to refer to commendations & good work minutes, annual PDRs, sickness record, character references from peers, supervisors & managers, which will be considered in mitigation by the Chair, usually after finding facts and prior to the outcome.

The college of policing has published guidance on the outcomes of misconduct proceedings, reproduced in this section.

If the case against you is admitted or otherwise found, the formal outcomes available are:

  • No further action
  • Management advice
  • Written warning-lasts 12 months from the date of the finding 
  • Final Written warning-lasts 18 months from the date of the finding 

You will be supplied a written record of the findings & outcome within 5 working days of the Meeting.

Appeal- Misconduct Meeting

You may lodge an appeal within 7 working days (exceptionally later) of receipt of the written notice on the following (significant) grounds;

  • The finding or outcome were unreasonable
  • New evidence that could not have reasonably been considered & could materially affect the finding(s) or outcome
  • Breach of procedures or other unfairness, which could have materially affected the finding(s) or outcome

Misconduct Hearing

A decision that you will attend a Misconduct Hearing means your job is in jeopardy. A Misconduct Hearing is a quasi-legal hearing heard by a 3 person panel;

  • Legally qualified chair
  • Supt or above
  • Lay member

There is a presumption the Hearing will be held in public (subject to limited exceptions). The case against you will be presented by a lawyer. You are entitled to legal representation. The papers are disclosed no more than 30 working days in advance, giving you & your legal team time to make decisions & formally respond. Key decisions to be made are;

Is the breach(es) of the Standards of Professional Behaviour accepted as amounting to Gross Misconduct, if not;

  • Are the breaches accepted as amounting to Misconduct
  • Is there proper grounds for objection to any member of the panel
  • Is there to be a request for redaction(s)
  • Is there to be a request for additional disclosure
  • What, if any witnesses are to be requested
  • What case law you consider relevant for consideration by the Panel
  • What if any additional papers may be referred to

In mitigation your legal team may wish to refer to commendations & good work minutes, annual PDRs, sickness record, character references from peers, supervisors & managers, which will be considered by the Chair, usually after finding facts, a decision as to whether the breaches of the SOPB amount to Misconduct or Gross Misconduct, & prior to the outcome.

The college of policing has published guidance on the outcomes of misconduct proceedings.

Where the breaches are found proven & amount to Misconduct, the formal outcomes available to the Chair of the Hearing are:

  • No further action
  • Management advice
  • Written warning-lasts 12 months from the date of the finding 
  • Final Written warning-lasts 18 months from the date of the finding 

Where the breaches are found proven & amount to Gross Misconduct, the additional formal outcome available to the panel is;

  • Dismissal

You will be supplied a written record of the findings & outcome within 5 working days of the Hearing.

Appeal-Misconduct Hearing

You or your legal team may lodge notice of an appeal within 10 working days (exceptionally later) of receipt of the written notice on the following (significant) grounds;

The finding or outcome were unreasonable

New evidence that could not have reasonably been considered & could materially affect the finding(s) or outcome

Breach of procedures or other unfairness, which could have materially affected the finding(s) or outcome

The appeal process following a Misconduct Hearing is governed by The Police Appeals Tribunal (PAT) Rules 2012.

The chair of the PAT shall in the first instance consider whether the appeal should be dismissed because;

  • The appeal has no real prospect of success; and
  • There is no other compelling reason why the appeal should proceed.

If the Chair decides to progress to an appeal hearing, notice will be given of at least 20 working days.

The PAT will be heard by a 3 person panel;

  • Legally qualified chair (approved by the Lord Chancellor)
  • Chief Officer of a neighbouring force
  • A retired federation representative (to be replaced by a lay member in 2019)

A PAT is held in private, but may be attended by the IOPC & the complainant as appropriate.

The PAT is entitled to impose any outcome the original panel could have imposed or remit the case back to a fresh panel.

You will be supplied a written record of the findings & outcome within 3 working days of the PAT.

If the appeal is successful the PAT may remit the case to be heard at a Misconduct Hearing by a fresh panel.

If the grounds of the appeal were as at 1. above, the PAT may re-instate the officer pending the Misconduct Hearing, notwithstanding the host force may immediately suspend the officer from the workplace.

Special Case Hearing

The Fast Track Procedure for Special Cases is laid out from Regulation 41 of the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2012.

A decision that you will attend a Special Case Hearing means your job is in jeopardy. This is an abbreviated Hearing before the Chief Constable, no witnesses are called on the basis the evidence is incontrovertible (Regulation 53(5)).

There is a presumption the Hearing will be held in public (subject to limited exceptions). The case against you is likely to be presented by PSD. You are unlikely to be legally funded (but there is no bar [beyond financial] to you being legally represented), unless there is an ongoing criminal prosecution (no hearing should proceed if it would prejudice criminal proceedings). The papers are disclosed between 10 & 15 working days prior to the Hearing. Key decisions are;

  • Are the breaches accepted as amounting to Gross Misconduct
  • Do you wish to make submissions in mitigation
  • Do you dispute any allegation
  • Do you wish to refer to any points of law
  • Do you wish to refer to any additional papers

Where the breaches are found to amount to Gross Misconduct, the formal outcomes available to the Chief Constable are;

  • Final Written Warning (or in exceptional circumstances an extension to a FWW)
  • Dismissal

If Gross Misconduct is not found the case may be dismissed or put to a Misconduct Meeting.

You will be supplied a written record of the findings & outcome within 5 working days of the Special Case Hearing.

Appeal-Special Case Hearing

You or your legal team may lodge notice of an appeal within 10 working days (exceptionally later) of receipt of the written notice on the following (significant) grounds;

  • The finding or outcome were unreasonable
  • New evidence that could not have reasonably been considered & could materially affect the finding(s) or outcome
  • Breach of procedures or other unfairness, which could have materially affected the finding(s) or outcome

The appeal process following a Misconduct Hearing is governed by The Police Appeals Tribunal (PAT) Rules 2012.

The chair of the PAT shall in the first instance consider whether the appeal should be dismissed because;

  • The appeal has no real prospect of success; and
  • There is no other compelling reason why the appeal should proceed.

If the Chair decides to progress to an appeal hearing, notice will be given of at least 20 working days (i.e. the start & finish of the process are time lined, but not the middle).

The PAT will be heard by a 3 person panel;

  • Legally qualified chair (approved by the Lord Chancellor)
  • Chief Officer of a neighbouring force
  • A retired federation representative (to be replaced by a lay member in 2019)

A PAT is held in private, but may be attended by the IPCC & the complainant as appropriate.

You will be supplied a written record of the findings & outcome within 3 working days of the PAT.

If the appeal is successful the PAT may remit the case to be heard at a Misconduct Hearing by a fresh panel.

If the grounds of the appeal were as at 1. above, the PAT may re-instate the officer pending the Misconduct Hearing, notwithstanding the host force may be unwilling to allow the officer into the workplace.

Interaction with Unsatisfactory Performance & Attendance Procedures-UPP

HOG 3.257. A police officer may be referred to an unsatisfactory performance meeting or stage 3 gross incompetence meeting as a result of a public complaint or conduct matter.

HOG 3.259. Where a case has been referred to a stage 3 meeting for gross incompetence as a result of an investigation of a public complaint or a conduct matter…the complainant or interested person will be permitted to attend and remain in the meeting until the conclusion of the proceedings, after having given evidence.

HOG 3.262. The IOPC has the right to attend the proceedings to make representations in any case where an independent or managed investigation was undertaken, or where the IOPC made a recommendation or direction to the appropriate authority with regard to the proceedings

HOG 3.263. In any case dealt with under the UPPs as a result of a public complaint or conduct matter the appropriate authority will have a duty to inform the complainant and interested persons of the outcome of those proceedings whether they attend or not. 

Read the section on Performance for more information on UPP.

Advisory & Barred Former Officer list

From 12th December 2015 officers were prevented under regulation 10A from resigning (or retiring-which is resignation but triggering pension entitlements) whilst under investigation for Gross Misconduct, or Misconduct where a Final Written Warning was in place (under the 2012 regulations-not for ongoing historic investigations under 2008 regulations), this was an interim measure to address public confidence issues.

From 15th December 2017 officers are again allowed to resign but subject to new regulations, which seek to insure against the repeat of an officer cannot leave one policing organisation so avoiding potential dismissal & re-join another policing organisation. As such, where an officer would previously have been prevented from resigning, the investigation may now continue in their absence, or even begin after they have left & in the most serious & exceptional cases where the resignation is over 12 months prior.

Advisory List

Where an officer (or police staff or volunteer) resigns whilst under investigation for a matter which could have led to their dismissal (Gross Misconduct, or Misconduct where a Final Written Warning was in place or stage 3 UPP-Unsatisfactory Performance Procedures), the force will notify the College of Policing, who will enter the officer onto the Advisory list.

The list is not public facing & is not an absolute bar for a policing organisation to employ someone. The individual will stay on the list until an outcome has been determined.

Barred List

If an investigation is taken to the conclusion and the outcome at a Hearing or Fast Track Special Case Hearing is (or where an officer has resigned would otherwise have been) dismissal, the force will notify the College of Policing, who will enter the officer onto the Barred list.

Once entered onto the Barred List an individual cannot be employed, or where already employed, cannot continue to be employed by a policing organisation.

The list is public facing (subject to a successful application for a publication exemption) via entering a name search on the COP website for 5 years. Thereafter the list will only be accessible to policing organisations.

Publication exemptions;

  • National Security
  • Prejudice the investigation or other civil/criminal proceedings
  • Significant risk of harm to an individual, including the officer
  • An individual may be removed upon;
  • Successful appeal
  • Performance or attendance which does not amount to gross incompetence (see UPP section) after 12 months
  • Gross Incompetence-on successful application to the COP after 3 years
  • Conduct dismissal-on successful application to the COP after 5 years
  • Death

The bar for removal is a high one.

The Police Conduct Regulations 2012

These regulations deal with matters including internal reports of conduct and potential meeting & hearing or special case hearing thereafter.

The Police Complaint & Misconduct Regulations 2012

These regulations deal with matters including public complaints & referrals to the IPCC via the Police Reform Act 2002.

Home Office Guidance (Updated November 2017)

This guidance is issued by the Home Office under the Police Act 1996 to cover Police Officer Misconduct, Unsatisfactory Performance & Attendance Management Procedures, which should not be departed from without good reason.

IPCC Statutory Guidance to the Police Service-May 2015

This guidance is issued under the Police Reform Act 2002 & governs much of the work of our Professional Standards Department.

Discharge of a Probationer

There is a separate process for the Chief Constable to deal with a probationary officer as below-except where a probationer tenders their resignation, which must always be accepted.

Where there is an assessment of gross misconduct & the primary facts are disputed, at the conclusion of an investigation the Chief Constable should dispense with this regulation & place the probationer on a misconduct hearing.

Police Regulations 2003, regulation 13

Subject to the provisions of this regulation, during his period of probation in the force the services of a constable or DE superintendent may be dispensed with at any time if the chief officer considers that he is not fitted, physically or mentally, to perform the duties of his office, or that he is not likely to become an efficient or well conducted constable or superintendent.

A constable DE superintendent whose services are dispensed with under this regulation shall be entitled to receive a month’s notice or a month’s pay in lieu thereof.

A constable’s DE superintendent’s services shall not be dispensed with in accordance with this regulation and any notice given for the purposes thereof shall cease to have effect if he gives written notice to the police authority of his intention to retire and retires in pursuance of the said notice on or before the date on which his services would otherwise be dispensed with; and such a notice taking effect on that date shall be accepted by the police authority notwithstanding that less than a month’s notice is given.

Where a constable DE superintendent has received a notice under this regulation that his services are to be dispensed with and he gives written notice of his intention to retire and retires under paragraph (3), he shall nevertheless be entitled to receive pay up to and until the date on which the month notice he has received would have expired or where he has received or is due to receive a month’s pay in lieu of notice he shall remain entitled to that pay notwithstanding the notice he has given under paragraph (3).

Judicial Review

Often spoken & generally misunderstood. Judicial Reviews are a route to challenge significant decisions where a strong public interest can be demonstrated. JR is a prolonged process & an exorbitantly expensive (potential) remedy within narrow parameters as an extract from the Courts & Tribunals Judiciary demonstrates below;

A judicial review is a type of court proceeding in which a judge reviews the lawfulness of a decision or action made by a public body.

In other words, judicial reviews are a challenge to the way in which a decision has been made, rather than the rights and wrongs of the conclusion reached.

It is not really concerned with the conclusions of that process and whether those were ‘right’, as long as the right procedures have been followed. The court will not substitute what it thinks is the ‘correct’ decision.

This may mean that the public body will be able to make the same decision again, so long as it does so in a lawful way.

If you want to argue that a decision was incorrect, judicial review may not be best for you. 

Death or Serious Injury (DSI)

The definition of a DSI (which carries a mandatory referral to the IPCC) is contained within the IPCC Statutory Guidance to the Police Service at section 7;

A DSI matter means any circumstances (unless the circumstances are or have been the subject of a complaint or amount to a conduct matter) in, or as a result of which, a person has died or sustained serious injury and:

at the time of death or serious injury the person had been arrested by a person serving with the police and had not been released or was otherwise detained in the custody of a person serving with the police; or

at or before the time of death or serious injury the person had contact of any kind – whether direct or indirect – with a person serving with the police who was acting in the execution of his or her duties and there is an indication that the contact may have caused – whether directly or indirectly – or contributed to the death or serious injury. However, this sub-category excludes contact that a person who suffered the death or serious injury had whilst he or she was acting in the execution or his or her duties as a person serving with the police.

Section 12, Police Reform Act 2002

‘Serious injury’ means a fracture, a deep cut, a deep laceration or an injury causing damage to an internal organ or the impairment of any bodily function.

Section 29, Police Reform Act 2002

Note-There is no defined time period relevant to the definition of a DSI.

Post Incident Procedure (PIP)

Guidance is provided by the College of Policing via Approved Professional Practice (APP) on Armed Policing. Many of your federation representatives are trained in PIP & can be called out via the Force Incident Manager (FIM).

https://www.app.college.police.uk/app-content/armed-policing/post-deployment/#post-incident-management

Whilst specific to armed policing, aspects of the PIP are used for other Death or Serious Injury (DSI) incidents. (The decision on whether to call a PIP sits with command).

Standards of Professional Behaviour (SOPB)

The SOPB are defined within the Police Conduct Regulations 2012, further guidance is contained within Home Office Guidance (HOG) version 4 at chapter 1, reproduced here;

Honesty and Integrity

Police officers are honest, act with integrity and do not compromise or abuse their position.

Authority, Respect and Courtesy

Police officers act with self-control and tolerance, treating members of the public and colleagues with respect and courtesy.

Police officers do not abuse their powers or authority and respect the rights of all individuals.

Equality and Diversity

Police officers act with fairness and impartiality. They do not discriminate unlawfully or unfairly.

Use of Force

Police officers only use force to the extent that it is necessary, proportionate and reasonable in all the circumstances.

Orders and Instructions

Police officers only give and carry out lawful orders and instructions. 1.18. Police officers abide by police regulations, force policies and lawful orders.

Duties and Responsibilities

Police officers are diligent in the exercise of their duties and responsibilities.

When deciding if a police officer has neglected his or her duties all of the circumstances should be taken into account. Police officers have wide discretion and may have to prioritise the demands on their time and resources. This may involve leaving a task to do a different one, which in their judgement is more important. This is accepted and in many cases essential for good policing.

Confidentiality

Police officers treat information with respect and access or disclose it only in the proper course of police duties.

Where a police officer provides any reference in a private as opposed to professional capacity, then he or she will make this clear to the intended recipient and will emphasise that it is being provided in a private capacity and no police information has been accessed or disclosed in giving such a reference.

Fitness for Duty

Police officers when on duty or presenting themselves for duty are fit to carry out their duties and responsibilities.

Discreditable Conduct

Police officers behave in a manner which does not discredit the police service or undermine public confidence, whether on or off duty.

Police officers report any action taken against them for a criminal offence, conditions imposed by a court or the receipt of any penalty notice.

Discredit can be brought on the police by an act itself or because public confidence in the police is undermined. In general, it should be the actual underlying conduct of the police officer that is considered under the misconduct procedures, whether the conduct occurred on or off duty. However where a police officer has been convicted of a criminal offence that alone may lead to misconduct action irrespective of the nature of the conduct itself. In all cases it must be clearly articulated how the conduct or conviction discredits the police.

Challenging and Reporting Improper Conduct

Police officers report, challenge or take action against the conduct of colleagues which has fallen below the standards of professional behaviour expected.

Off-duty conduct

Police officers have some restrictions on their private life. These restrictions are laid down in the Police Regulations 2003. These restrictions have to be balanced against the right to a private life. Therefore, in considering whether a police officer has acted in a way which falls below these standards while off-duty, due regard should be given to that balance and any action should be proportionate taking into account all of the circumstances.

Even when off duty, police officers do not behave in a manner that discredits the police service or undermines public confidence.

In determining whether a police officer’s off-duty conduct discredits the police, the test is not whether the police officer discredits herself or himself but the police as a whole.

Police officers are particularly aware of the image that they portray when representing the police in an official capacity even though they may be off-duty (e.g. at a conference).

When police officers produce their warrant card (other than for identification purposes only) or act in a way to suggest that they are acting in their capacity as a police officer (e.g. declaring that they are a police officer) they are demonstrating that they are exercising their authority and have therefore put themselves on duty and will act in a way which conforms to these standards. For example, during a dispute with a neighbour a police officer who decides to produce a warrant card would be considered to be on duty.

Police officers may only hold or undertake a business interest or an additional occupation where an application to hold or undertake it has been approved in accordance with the Police Regulations 2003. Police officers do not conduct such interests or occupations if approval has been refused or withdrawn, nor do they breach any condition of approval imposed.

All forms of management action and formal outcomes for misconduct are available in response to off-duty conduct.

Code of Ethics

The Code of Ethics is a code of practice (under section 39A of the Police Act 1996), owned by the College of Policing. It is a series of benchmarks for on & off duty behaviour, which overlays the standards of professional behaviour (SOPB).

http://www.college.police.uk/What-we-do/Ethics/Pages/Code-of-Ethics.aspx

Challenging and Reporting Improper Conduct

Police officers report, challenge or take action against the conduct of colleagues which has fallen below the Standards of Professional Behaviour (SOPB) expected.

This is a Standard of Professional Behaviour & as such if an officer witnesses a colleague breach the SOPB  & does not challenge, or report, or otherwise take action, may result in service of a notice together with an otherwise avoidable investigation.  It is for the officer to justify what course of action they took.

If you find yourself in circumstances where you must report a colleague you may contact the Federation for support.

We would allocate a discipline trained representative to the officer reported, but we would provide you with a different representative to avoid potential conflict.

Whistleblowing

https://thehub.polfed.org/subs/Equality/Documents/Members%20advice%20leaflets/Whistleblowing-2017-9-web.pdf

Contact Details
Paul Aspinall
Paul Aspinall
0114 2291381
PAspinall@sypf.polfed.org
Facebook
Twitter
curve
SYPF Team

The SYPF Team

There are curently 25 members of South Yorkshire Police Federation Joint Branch Board, 22 of whom are workplace representatives who combine their duties as police officers with their voluntary additional work for the Police Federation. Three Joint Branch Board members, the General Secretary, Chairman and Discipline Liaison Officer work as full time representatives at the Federation Office. 

In addition we employ two members of secretarial support staff at the Federation Office, who not only look after administration matters but also give telephone advice on a range of issues from Member Service Schemes to Police Regulations. 

meet our team