Complaints investigation summary for December 2023

We completed 125 complaint investigations in December 2023.

  • 82 were not upheld
  • 1 was not upheld mediated
  • 31 were upheld and partially upheld
  • 11 were upheld or partially upheld mediated
Upheld complaint against the Governors of HMP Dartmoor and HMP Exeter

Complaint category: Administration

Subcategory: Complaints procedure

Summary: The prisoner complained that he had not received a response from a COMP 2 confidential access complaint that he had submitted. Our investigation found that that it was opened in error by the Governor of Exeter despite it being addressed to the PGD, and then sent it to Dartmoor where it was responded to by the Deputy Governor.

Recommendations/outcome:  We recommended that both Governors apologise to the prisoner and ensure that, going forward, confidential access complaints should not be opened by anyone other than to whom they are addressed and that they should then determine whether to delegate the response to another Senior Manager.

 

Partially upheld complaint against the Director at HMP Doncaster

Complaint category: Staff behaviour

Subcategory: General

Summary: The prisoner believed that prison staff were arranging for other prisoners to attack him.

Recommendations/outcome: We did not uphold the main aspect of the complaint as we were satisfied that the prison had carried out an investigation at a senior level and could not find evidence to support the prisoner’s claims.  However, we were concerned that the CCTV footage viewed as part of the investigation had not been retained and that several adjudications had not been closed off on the prisoner’s NOMIS record.  We wrote to the Director to advise him of these concerns and asked for the adjudications to be closed off.

 

Upheld complaint against the Governor of HMP Littlehey

Complaint category: Property

Subcategory: Missing

Summary: The prisoner complained he’d loaned a DVD and HDMI cable to another prisoner and after a cell search of that prisoner they had been removed, he wanted his property back. During the investigation the items were identified and returned.

Recommendations/Outcome:  Situation resolved.

 

Upheld complaint against the Governor of HMP Stoke Heath

Complaint category: Administration

Subcategory: General

Summary: The prisoner complained that they were denied copies of adjudication related paperwork prior to the hearing, so were unable to adequately prepare their defence.

Recommendations/outcome:  We asked the prison to apologise for the poor handling of the complaint and asked that the prisoner be provided with all documentation he was entitled to. We reminded the prison of the need for all relevant staff to be made aware of the paperwork that prisoners are entitled to receive before an adjudication hearing.

We hold the view that this complaint should clearly have been resolved by the prison without reference to IPCI.

 

Upheld complaint against the Governor of HMP Full Sutton

Complaint category: Administration

Subcategory: Incorrect information on an RC1 Recategorisation review.

Summary: The prisoner complained about incorrect information on his recategorisation review documentation which had the potential to affect his progression. The prison stated the information had been pulled from NOMIS and automatically generated. They couldn’t identify who had inputted the information.

Recommendations/outcome:  We asked the information be amended and that the risk and capabilities unit (RCU) in HMPPS provide guidance on this. We also asked HMPPS take steps to ensure this erroneous or unsubstantiated information not be used at forthcoming reviews.

 

Partially upheld complaint against the Governor of HMP Full Sutton

Complaint category: Administration

Subcategory: Complaints

Summary: The prisoner complained about the delay in being told the outcome of a formal investigation into an issue he raised through confidential access. We investigated and ascertained that the formal investigation concluded within 28 days, as was expected within the relevant policy, however there had been a significant delay in communicating the outcome to the prisoner.

Recommendations/outcome:  There are no formal timescales set out for responding to prisoners in the content of internal investigations, but we found there was a very long delay in this instance, and flagged this to the Governor as something that should be addressed.

We hold the view that this complaint should clearly have been resolved by the prison without reference to IPCI.

 

Partially upheld complaint against the Governor of HMP The Verne

Complaint category: Administration

Subcategory: Video calls

Summary: Prisoner complained that 3rd parties attempted to join his video link with his representatives. Our investigation found that both Prison and legal reps confirmed this happened, but both denied passing on the details wrongly.

Recommendation/outcome: With the evidence that was available to IPCI we were unable to apportion specific blame but upheld on the basis that the complaint was factually accurate.

 

Partially upheld complaint against the Governor at HMP Whatton

Complaint category: IEP

Subcategory: Level

Summary: The prisoner complained that he was placed on basic regime for 28 days after a single serious incident. The investigation found that Whatton’s local IEP places prisoners on basic regime automatically for 28 days after a single serious incident. While the downgrade to basic was compliant with national policy, the decision that he was to remain on basic for 28 days regardless of his behaviour during that time was not.

Recommendations/outcome:  We recommended that Whatton amend their local policy.

 

Upheld complaint against the Governor at HMP Frankland

Complaint category: Visits

Subcategory: Closed visits

Summary: The prisoner complained that he had been placed on closed visits for six months. We found that the initial decision to place him on closed visits for six months and subsequent review were not policy compliant.

Recommendations/outcome: The prison agreed to carry out an immediate review and the prisoner was removed from closed visits. Frankland also agreed to review the overall process for placing prisoners on closed visits to ensure they continued to comply with policy.

Partially upheld complaint against the Governor at HMP Littlehey

Complaint category: Letters

Subcategory: Recorded delivery

Summary: The prisoner complained that a letter he wanted to send recorded delivery was not sent, and he incurred costs. We established it most likely that the cash disbursement form had become detached from the letter, resulting in the letter not being sent recorded delivery. Given the number of letters sent across the prison that must be viewed as a risk, and the prison agreed to apologise. However, we did not find the prison responsible for any costs as we couldn’t say for sure if or how the cash disbursement form became detached.

Recommendations/outcome: The prison apologised.

Upheld against the Governor in HMP Northumberland

Complaint category:   Visits

Subcategory:  Restrictions/ delays

Summary:  The prisoner complained that his brother, despite having the required photographic identification, was refused entry to the prison.  Our investigation found that staff on visits duty that day were not fully conversant with the process for dealing with visitors and their identification requirements for entry.

Recommendations/outcome:  The prison Head of Security sent the prisoner a written apology and agreed to offer a re-issue of the Visiting Order (VO) used for this visit.