Allegations that officer caused a man to have an accident - Nottinghamshire Police, July 2016

On 29 July 2016, Nottinghamshire Police received a report that a man was sitting stationary in his car allegedly drinking from a can of beer. The member of the public who reported this said that the driver appeared intoxicated. A Nottinghamshire Police officer proceeded to the location of the car, which was now moving, and followed it. The man crashed his car, which rolled onto its roof. The man fractured his shoulder in the accident.

In January 2017 the man made a formal complaint to Nottinghamshire Police about the officer’s driving and the injury he sustained. He alleged that the police officer used the police vehicle he was driving to make direct contact with the rear of his own car, causing him to lose control and crash.

During the investigation, investigators interviewed witnesses and the officer. They collated electronic evidence and exhibits and examined CCTV footage. Our investigation found that the complainant was intoxicated at the time of the pursuit. The police vehicle was inspected and there was no forensic or physical damage caused to the police vehicle.

The actions of the officer indicated that he was pursuing the car. However, according to College of Policing guidelines, the officer was not authorised to do this. Neither was he trained to carry out pursuits.

Based on the evidence available we were of the opinion that there was sufficient evidence upon which a reasonable tribunal could conclude that the officer had a case to answer for misconduct.

After reviewing our report, Nottinghamshire Police disagreed with our findings. They were of the view that there was insufficient evidence to support the man’s allegations that he had been shunted by the police vehicle, and that there was therefore no case to answer for the officer in this respect.

Nottinghamshire Police advised that they had identified performance issues for the officer in relation to their knowledge of pursuits. The performance plan required the officer to take a driving retest, which he passed. He also had a pursuit input from the control room inspector.

We considered their response and agreed that their course of action was appropriate, and that no further action was needed.