NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED Police and Crime Commissioner North Yorkshire Mr N Wilby By Email mailto: CORNER. com 26/04/2016 Dear Mr Wilby Complaint against Chief Constable Dave JONES Your email of 12 April 2016 addressed to the OPCC main email inbox, has been referred to me for consideration. As the Police and Crime Commissioner's Acting Chief Executive & Monitoring Officer I have delegated responsibility to make the initial decisions in relation to complaints against the Chief Constable. In line with the law and the statutory guidance, I have considered whether the Police and Crime ‘Commissioner is the Appropriate Authority to consider your particular complaint. I have concluded that the Commissioner is the correct Appropriate Authority. I note that your email asserts complaints against officers of other ranks. In relation to those complaints, you can expect to hear from the North Yorkshire Police Professional Standards Department who are responsible for administering the process in relation to those officers. ‘The law and guidance requires me to determine whether the matters you raise are required to be recorded as a complaint against the Chief Constable. ‘The grounds upon which an Appropriate Authority can refuse to record a complaint include the following: + the complaint is vexatious, oppressive or otherwise an abuse of the procedures for dealing with complaints; or * the complaint is repetitious; o + the complaint is fanciful. Itis also open to an Appropriate Authority to record and then ‘disapply” a complaint, meaning that the Appropriate Authority decides not to deal with it in accordance with the complaints procedure. There are several grounds upon which ‘disapplication’ can be appropriate, including where the complaint is considered to be vexatious, oppressive or an abuse of procedure. NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED Simon Deni | Acting Chit Execitve & Monitoring Ofer Police Headquarters | Newby Wske Hal | Northallerton | North Yorkshire | OL” HA BE SAFENOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED Police and Crime Commissioner North Yorkshire ‘The IPCC regularly issues guidance to practitioners on the proper approach to these rules. That guidance encourages Appropriate Authorities who consider a complaint to be vexatious, oppressive or an abuse of process to choose to decline to record a complaint rather than record and then ‘disapply” it. T have determined that the matters you raise should not be recorded as complaints against the Chief Constable. This is because I consider that your complaint is vexatious, oppressive and ‘amounts to an abuse of the process for dealing with complaints. ‘The reason I consider that to be the appropriate decision is as follows + Your purported complaints against the Chief Constable do not amount to complaints within the meaning of the law or the statutory guidance which is defined as (with my emphasis) an expression of dissatisfaction by a member of the public about the conduct of a person serving with the police. Your purported complaint relates to an assertion contained in a document prepared by a third party, specifically Simon Myerson QC. + The document in question is a skeleton argument lodged in connection with civil proceedings which are ongoing. You are not a party in those proceedings. + You have provided no evidence, nor is there any sustainable assertion in your purported complaint, that Chief Constable Jones is responsible for the assertion in the document. Whilst I accept that you may be dissatisfied with my decision, I hope this you understand the reasons for it which I have set out above. ‘You have the right to appeal to the Independent Police Complaints Commission against my decision not to record your complaint, should you wish to do so. If you wish to appeal you must do so with 28 days commencing with the day after the date of this letter. Yours sincerely fot Simon Dennis Acting Chief Executive & Monitoring Officer NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED ee ee Se oe ( nctcporcave| uz BE SAFE