Response to missing person’s report - Lancashire Constabulary and Merseyside Police, October 2017

A man was away in Blackpool with his wife and two friends. He left their hotel in the early morning on 29 October 2017 and he sent a text message a short time later. There was no further contact with the man. Later that afternoon his wife reported him as missing to Lancashire Constabulary. This was graded as a medium risk and Lancashire Constabulary started to take action to try and locate the man. The force obtained intelligence suggesting that the man’s mobile phone was in Haydock, Merseyside. A social media appeal then led to possible sightings of the man in the St Helens area of Merseyside. As a result, Lancashire Constabulary (which remained the lead force for the investigation) requested assistance from Merseyside Police with their efforts to find the man. On 4 November 2017 the investigation was regraded as high risk due to the passage of time, and the fact that the man had not accessed money and that his mobile phone had been disconnected since the evening of 29 October. On 5 November a man was found dead on Southport beach, Merseyside. A short time later he was identified as the man missing from Blackpool.

The family of the man raised a number of complaints in relation to how the missing person investigation progressed, and not being kept updated. The family also made complaints in relation to members of police officers and police staff being unprofessional.

There was evidence to suggest that both Lancashire Constabulary and Merseyside Police carried out numerous tasks in an effort to try and locate the man. While the family had raised concerns with the time taken to pursue enquiries, we found no evidence to suggest that any action was unduly delayed.

Although the man’s family were unhappy about the level of contact they had with the police, there is no policy which stipulates minimum contact levels.

We found no evidence to substantiate either way the family’s complaint that police officers and staff had been unprofessional.

The man died of natural causes and there was no evidence – either visual or mobile phone contact – that the man was alive after the text message he sent at 8.31am on 29 October 2017, which was before any police force was notified that he was missing.

Based on the evidence available, the investigation found no indication that any person serving with the police may have behaved in a manner that would justify the bringing of disciplinary proceedings.