Summary: Mr X complained about how the Police and Crime Commissioner handled his contacts about the actions of officers of a police force, including those delegated to take actions on behalf of the Chief Constable. The Ombudsman’s decision is we should end our investigation. This is because Mr X is asking the Commissioner to respond to issues which were, in the first instance, related to reports of an alleged crime. The Ombudsman cannot look at matters related to investigation of a crime. We could not conduct a meaningful investigation without looking into those matters. And there is not enough potential injustice in the matters we could investigate to warrant our continued involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains for himself and on behalf of his daughter and ex-wife. For simplicity I have referred to Mr X only. They complain the Police Fire and Crime Commissioner (whom I shall refer to as the Commissioner) has:
• failed to properly investigate complaints against Staffordshire Police;
• failed to consider the wider issues raised by those complaints and record their concerns;
• not given good enough reasons why he has not accepted the complaint or recorded what they were reporting.

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate. Police and Crime Commissioners are within our jurisdiction. But we can only investigate administrative actions taken by the Commissioner themselves.
3. The Ombudsman cannot investigate complaints about actions taken by Police and Crime Commissioners (or any other body in our jurisdiction) about the investigation or prevention of crime. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5, paragraph 2)
4. We can decide whether to start or discontinue an investigation into a complaint within our jurisdiction. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered:
• information provided by Mr X about their complaint;
• the Ombudsman’s powers to investigate complaints involving the Police and Crime Commissioners;

• information the Commissioner sent me in response to my enquiries.

6. I have also:
• spoken to Mr X and the Commissioner’s officer; and
• sent my draft decision to Mr X and the Commissioner’s office and considered the responses I received.

Back to top

What I found

Legal and administrative background

The role of Police and Crime Commissioners

7. Police and Crime Commissioners are elected officials responsible for overseeing police forces. Commissioners’ main responsibilities are maintaining an adequate and efficient police force and to provide satisfactory buildings, vehicles and equipment. They also have a role in holding the chief constable of a force to account.
8. The law about which body deals with complaints against police forces changed in 2020. Mr X’s complaints about Staffordshire Police (which I will refer to as the police force) are about issues that he reported to the police before 2020. So the Regulations I must judge his complaint to the Ombudsman by are the pre-2020 ones. These were the 2012 Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations. Under those Regulations, Police and Crime Commissioners did not have any role in investigating complaints.

The Ombudsman’s jurisdiction in relation to Police and Crime Commissioners

9. Complaints about Commissioners that may be within the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction include such administrative acts as land acquisition or disposal and liability as a landlord. A commissioner failing to deal with a complaint could be an administrative action we could investigate. But courts have decided the Ombudsman cannot investigate something where we cannot investigate the underlying complaint.
10. More generally, the Ombudsman cannot to investigate complaints about the investigation or prevention of crime.

What happened

11. Mr X has been in communication with the police force for some time about complaints by him (as already noted, including on behalf of his family), about the actions of its officers. The early reasons for Mr X’s contacts were concerns about how the police had dealt with a criminal matter. But Mr X says his later communications have been about the way officers dealt with him and his family, including discriminatory behaviour.
12. Mr X first emailed the Commissioner’s office in early 2019, about the way the police force had responded to his complaints. The Commissioner’s officer acknowledged Mr X’s emails, but advised him he would need to go through the police force’s complaints procedure. Mr X disputes this is what happened – he says he was advised the Commissioner would respond to him.
13. In December 2019 and towards the end of 2020 Mr X contacted the Commissioner’s office again. The Commissioner’s officer briefed the Commissioner and emailed Mr X in early 2021. The officer advised Mr X the Commissioner did not have a role in the issues he was contacting the Commissioner about.
14. In 2021 the elected Commissioner changed. In July Mr X emailed the new Commissioner about his predecessor’s inaction. He also asked the Commissioner to use his powers to hold the police force’s Chief Constable to account. The Commissioner replied to say:

• “I do not feel I can help with further with your historic complaints so I will not correspond with you further on them.”
• “My position does not allow me to do more about your individual complaints.”
• “…in order for it to be a complaint against the Chief Constable it actually has to involve his or her conduct.

Your complaint against the Chief Constable does not relate to their direct actions, but instead references actions that have been delegated…the matters you are raising have had no direct involvement from the Chief Constable.”

15. Mr X says he has tried to complain to other organisations, who have said they cannot help. So he complained to the Ombudsman.

Analysis

16. The law does not allow the Ombudsman to look at matters related to the investigation of crime. Mr X says his complaint is about the way the police force has dealt with its communications with them, including discriminatory behaviour, not about a crime. But Mr X started to communicate with the police, in the first instance, about matters related to a crime. I do not see that I could carry out an investigation into the Commissioner’s role without also investigating issues the Ombudsman cannot consider.
17. The Ombudsman does have powers to look at administrative matters related to the Commissioner’s actions. But the Commissioner did not have powers to investigate complaint at the time Mr X’s complaint relate to. So I do not consider we could achieve anything through an investigation.
18. In response to my draft decision Mr X says they did not want the Commissioner to investigate a complaint; instead they wanted the Commissioner to respond to and record his issues. I can see the Commissioners (both the incumbent and his predecessor) and their office have communicated with Mr X. There is a record on its file of Mr X’s complaints. It is for the Commissioner to decide which emails he receives require substantive responses. My review of the Commissioner’s file does not support Mr X’s assertion the Commissioner told him he would do something and then did not do it (see paragraph 12). I do not see that further investigation would likely conclude the Commissioner should have done more.
19. Mr X argues the Commissioner could have dealt with his complaint under his powers to hold the Chief Constable to account. The Commissioner had provided cogent reasons why he does not agree with Mr X’s analysis.
20. So, overall, there is no worthwhile outcome the Ombudsman could achieve for Mr X. So my decision is I should end my investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

21. I have ended my investigation as the Ombudsman cannot investigate most of this complaint without consider matters outside our jurisdiction. And with the administrative matters we could investigate, it is unlikely we could provide a meaningful outcome for Mr X and his family.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman