Complaints investigation summary for January 2024
We completed 155 complaint investigations in January 2024.
- 103 were not upheld
- 26 were upheld and partially upheld
- 26 were upheld or partially upheld mediated
Upheld complaint against the Director of HMP Oakwood
Complaint category: Property
Subcategory: Missing
Summary: The prisoner complained that some of their property had been lost by HMP Oakwood after they transferred to HMP Stoke Heath. After IPCI’s involvement the prisoner’s property was checked and it was established that all property had arrived, albeit after the prisoner transferred.
Recommendations/outcome:
The prisoner has been reunited with the missing property.
Partially upheld complaint against the Governor at HMP Wymott
Complaint category: Staff behaviour
Subcategory: Alleged assault (not Use of Force)
Summary: The prisoner complained that he had been bullied, harassed, and assaulted by a member of staff and that CCTV and BWVC footage was not made available for his adjudication or our investigation.
Recommendations/outcome: Our investigation found that the prison had investigated the incident and disciplinary action had been taken. We recommended the prisoner was issued with a written apology. We also asked the prison to issue a Notice to Staff relating to Conduct and Discipline PSI and to remind staff of the need to retain CCTV and BWVC footage for the purposes of internal and IPCI investigations.
Upheld complaint against the Governor at HMP Lewes and HMP Ford
Complaint category: Property
Subcategory: Missing
Summary: The prisoner complained that a large amount of his property had gone missing after a transfer.
Recommendations/outcome: Our investigation found that much of the prisoner’s property was subsequently accounted for, so we recommended HMP Lewes pay a small amount of compensation for the missing items. The investigation did reveal that HMP Ford had not used the correct Cell Clearance paperwork referred to in the Policy Framework, so we recommended the prison issue a Notice to Staff reminding staff of the need to use the correct paperwork.
Upheld against the Governor of HMP Chelmsford
Complaint category: Property
Subcategory: Missing
Summary: The prisoner complained about the lengthy delay in his excess property being sent to him after he transferred to another prison.
Recommendations/outcome: We upheld the complaint because the prisoner’s excess property had not been forwarded to him within four weeks, as required by the Prisoners’ Property Policy Framework, and there were no exceptional circumstances. We have been assured that measures have been put in place to avoid such delays occurring in the future.
Partially upheld complaint against the Governor at HMP Dartmoor
Complaint category: Staff Behaviour
Subcategory: General
Summary: The prisoner complained that sensitive information about him was shared with other prisoners, and this made him vulnerable, and it had potential repercussions for him in relation to a subsequent transfer. We also found that there was inaccurate record keeping of a connection between prisoners related to this data breach.
Recommendations/outcome: Following our investigation, the prison acknowledged a data breach incident and took action to ensure this incident was not repeated. We recommended that the prison ensure there are appropriate procedures in place to ensure transparency around decision making, especially in relation to risk assessments related to the safety of the prisoner.
Upheld against HMPPS West Midlands Probation Area
Complaint category: Resettlement
Subcategory: Release on temporary licence (ROTL)
Summary: The prisoner complained about a delay in his overnight ROTL being processed and agreed.
Recommendations/outcome: We upheld the complaint as our investigation identified that HMPPS West Midlands area were responsible for the delay, despite receiving the required paperwork from the prison in a timely fashion.
Partially upheld complaint against the Governor of HMP Littlehey
Complaint category: Categorisation
Subcategory: Recategorisation
Summary: The prisoner complained about his security category status changing from D to C at HMP Littlehey in March 2023, and not being informed of the decision until July 2023. The prisoner had been transferred from open conditions to Littlehey to undertake risk reduction work identified by the Parole Board.
Recommendations/outcome: We recognised that increasing the prisoner’s security classification was a decision that the prison was required to make in accordance with a wider HMPPS directive. However, we considered the prisoner should have been informed of the decision at the time and not four months later and, on that basis, we partially upheld the complaint.
Partially upheld complaint against the Governor of HMP/YOI Aylesbury
Complaint category: Letters
Subcategory: Rule 39 / Confidential Access
Summary: The prisoner complained about the opening of two pieces of his Rule 39 mail. Our investigation identified that the two letters were provided to the prisoner in a damaged condition, and that one of the letters could have been read.
Recommendations/outcome: We partially upheld the complaint. We did not believe that either letter was intentionally opened and read by staff but found that due care was not used to ensure it was damaged more than necessary for the purpose of security. The prisoner received an apology. The prison instructed staff dealing with prisoners’ correspondence to do so with care and respect, and to record incidents where mail enters the prison damaged and to inform recipients.
Partially upheld against the Governor in HMP Stocken
Complaint category: Staff behaviour
Subcategory: Use of force
Summary: The prisoner complained that inappropriate force was used on him.
Recommendations/outcome: We upheld the complaint in part. Whilst we were satisfied that the use of force was appropriate, we had concerns about completion of the use of force paperwork and the retention of footage. To note – this use of force incident happened in 2022 and we have received assurances from the Use of Force Co-ordinator about changes made to how UoF are now dealt with which negated the need for formal recommendations on this occasion.
Partially upheld complaint against the Governor of HMP Frankland
Complaint category: Security, IEP
Subcategory: Body scanner
Summary: The prisoner complained that he was downgraded from Enhanced to Basic IEP level following several scans on the body scanner, and that he did not have his IEP appeal heard which resulted in him losing his job. Our investigation found that the prison was justified in the use of the body scanner, however that there were several procedural errors and omissions made during the scans and the IEP downgrade.
Recommendations/outcome: We concluded that it was not reasonable to use the IEP scheme in this instance. We recommended that the Governor arrange reimbursement for loss of earnings, that an IEP appeal recording process be implemented. We also asked that the prison demonstrate improved compliance with the Use of X Ray Body Scanner Policy Framework including the staff training in image interpretation.
Upheld complaint against the Governor of HMP Hindley
Complaint category: Property
Subcategory: Missing
Summary: The prisoner complained that following his transfer from HMP Hindley, some of his stored property was missing. Our investigation found that despite raising the COMP1 and COMP1A, HMP Hindley failed to identify the prisoners’ stored property, which had remained at HMP Hindley after his transfer.
Recommendations/outcome: We upheld the complaint, but there were no formal recommendations as HMP Hindley had subsequently located the missing stored property and sent this on to the prisoner.
We hold the view that this complaint should have been resolved by the prison without reference to IPCI.
Upheld complaint against the Governor of HMP Stoke Heath
Complaint category: Administration
Subcategory: Confidential access
Summary: The prisoner complained that his Confidential Access (COMP 2) complaint was wrongly sent to someone other than the PGD to respond to. The prisoner clearly indicated the matter was for the Director’s attention, but instead it was sent to the OMU to provide a response.
Recommendations/outcome: We upheld the complaint, but there were no formal recommendations as the Business Hub at Stoke Heath had already acknowledged the error and apologised and there was no evidence this was a more widespread problem.
Upheld complaint against the Governor of HMP Birmingham
Complaint category: Correspondence
Subcategory: Recategorisation.
Summary: The prisoner complained that correspondence received through ‘email a prisoner’ had been printed off and wrongly handed to another prisoner with the same name.
Recommendations/outcome: We upheld the complaint, asked for an apology to be provided to the prisoner. We also asked the Governor to ensure they take action to bring to the attention of relevant staff the importance of checking they are providing correspondence to the right prisoner.
Partially upheld complaint against the Governor of HMP Onley
Complaint category: Administration
Subcategory: Catalogue orders
Summary: The prisoner complained that staff in the Business Hub ordered the wrong trainers after misinterpreting his catalogue order.
Recommendations/outcome: We partially upheld the complaint as we found that the order form had been misinterpreted. However, in the investigator’s opinion the handwriting was ambiguous, and it would not be reasonable to recommend compensation from public funds for a mistake that was reasonable human error.
Upheld complaint against the Governor of HMP Whatton
Complaint category: Regime
Subcategory: Access to facilities
Summary: The prisoner complained that he had missed a number of gym sessions due to not being unlocked because of issues with the morning roll count. Our investigation found was the case, but that the problem had since been resolved and the prisoner was once again receiving all the gym sessions he was entitled to.
Recommendations/outcome: We were satisfied that the prison had addressed the problems appropriately and that they were unlikely to reoccur.
Partially upheld complaint against the Governor of HMP Manchester
Complaint category: Regime
Subcategory: Access to facilities
Summary: The prisoner complained that they were not being given time in the open air when the prison held staff training days. We found this to be the case, but that these training days had since been reduced from two to one per month. The prison argued that their actions were necessary due to the shortage of fully trained staff, the intake of new staff and the need for them to be fully trained to maintain good order and discipline.
Recommendations/outcome: We partially upheld the complaint as time in the open is a mandatory requirement, but we accepted the prison’s reasoning and noted that the training days had been reduced since the time of the complaint.