Recommendations - Hampshire Police, June 2023

The IOPC recommends that the Hampshire & IOW Constabulary develop clear guidance concerning the seizure of animals and the investigation of offences under the Animal Welfare Act 2006. This guidance should:
(a)    identify whether this is a matter that should be led by the RSPCA or the Police;
(b)    if led by the RSPCA what support the Police will give, and 
(c)    if led by the police, best practice, key actions to be completed during such an investigation, seeking CPS advice, and the need for appropriate review by a supervisor and/or Dog Legislation Officer.

This follows a review conducted by the IOPC into a case concerning an adult with a neurodiversity and mental health issues.  Witnesses reported that he was behaving erratically in the street and was punching his dog. He was arrested and detained and his dog was seized under the Animal Welfare Act. 

The owner was not initially told that the dog had been seized but learned this later in the cells. During interview he was told he could arrange to collect the dog the next day but this was not in fact correct and the family struggled to get accurate information about what had happened to the dog, when it would be released and at one stage what if any contact was permissible with the kennels. This caused distress to the owner and his family, an alleged exacerbation of his mental health issues and considerable conflict with/ inconvenience to officers and 101 call handlers. CCTV showed the owner lifting his dog off the ground by the lead around its neck. He was subsequently charged with offences under the Animal Welfare Act 2006. The owner was acquitted at trial and the dog was returned to him, having been in kennels for approximately 14 months.

A Dog Legislation Officer from the Joint Operations Unit reviewed the case and identified possible areas for learning and improvement. She indicated that the case was not an isolated one and noted that there had been an increase in dogs being seized, allegedly due to RSPCA resourcing issues. She identified the need to ensure that officers were using the correct powers of seizure, policies were up to date and followed and case files were reviewed in a timely fashion to ensure that dogs were not being retained without good justification. 
 

Recommendation accepted:

Action taken:

a)    The force’s position is that primacy for animal welfare matters sit with the RSPCA with the police undertaking a supportive function.  In exceptional circumstances the police would take a primary prosecution role however the Dog Legislation Officer (DLO) who operates across the Joint Operations Unit (between Hampshire and TVP) will be the person the Officer will contact.  

b)    The DLO has revised information in the Approved Operational Guidance document (Section 5) that details the support to be given

c)    The DLO has revised information in the Approved Operational Guidance (AOG) document (Section 5) that details of key actions required

A copy of the AOG accompanies this document.
 

The IOPC recommends that Hampshire & IOW Constabulary should review the training provided to officers to ensure they clearly understand their powers of seizure under the Animal Welfare Act 2006, including the procedures that should be followed when exercising such a power.
This follows a review conducted by the IOPC into a case concerning an adult with a neurodiversity and mental health issues.  Witnesses reported that he was behaving erratically in the street and was punching his dog. He was arrested and detained and his dog was seized under the Animal Welfare Act. 

The owner was not initially told that the dog had been seized but learned this later in the cells. During interview he was told he could arrange to collect the dog the next day but this was not in fact correct and the family struggled to get accurate information about what had happened to the dog, when it would be released and at one stage what if any contact was permissible with the kennels. This caused distress to the owner and his family, an alleged exacerbation of his mental health issues and considerable conflict with/ inconvenience to officers and 101 call handlers. CCTV showed the owner lifting his dog off the ground by the lead around its neck. He was subsequently charged with offences under the Animal Welfare Act 2006. The owner was acquitted at trial and the dog was returned to him, having been in kennels for approximately 14 months.
 

A Dog Legislation Officer from the Joint Operations Unit reviewed the case and identified  possible areas for learning and improvement. She indicated that the case was not an isolated one and noted that there had been an increase in dogs being seized, allegedly due to RSPCA resourcing issues. She identified the need to ensure that officers were using the correct powers of seizure, policies were up to date and followed and case files were reviewed in a timely fashion to ensure that dogs were not being retained without good justification. 

Recommendation not accepted:

We do not accept this recommendation.

The Force’ Learning and Professional Development team have confirmed that we do not currently specifically train officers with regard animal welfare matters on basis of time available within an already demanding training schedule resulting in priority being placed upon wider core policing functions.

The Learning & Professional Development Department have provided the following response:

“This is a specific area of policing where the responsibility lies with a partner agency (i.e. RSPCA) and although additional support may be required involving the presence of a police officer, it is not currently mandated within new to role training but information is available as online advice and guidance and provided as continual professional development (CPD) within some specialist areas of training e.g. Dog Handlers, Country Watch officers.”
It is however the case that the Force operates a mechanism that steers officers towards guidance and engagement of the DLO (within the JOU) who’ is there to provide specific knowledge regarding such matters.

Accompanying this response is a copy of a TVP guidance document which is to be added to Hampshire’s intranet site shortly.
 

The IOPC recommends that Hampshire & IOW Constabulary re-visit the procedures currently in place for the regular review of the retention of animals held by the force, to ensure their retention is still justified. This should include consideration of whether the procedure adequately identifies:
(a)    who should conduct a review;
(b)     the frequency by which reviews should be completed;
(c)    how reviews should be recorded; and
(d)    how to ensure appropriate internal scrutiny and monitoring of reviews.

This follows a review conducted by the IOPC into a case concerning an adult with a neurodiversity and mental health issues.  Witnesses reported that he was behaving erratically in the street and was punching his dog. He was arrested and detained and his dog was seized under the Animal Welfare Act. 

The owner was not initially told that the dog had been seized but learned this later in the cells. During interview he was told he could arrange to collect the dog the next day but this was not in fact correct and the family struggled to get accurate information about what had happened to the dog, when it would be released and at one stage what if any contact was permissible with the kennels. This caused distress to the owner and his family, an alleged exacerbation of his mental health issues and considerable conflict with/ inconvenience to officers and 101 call handlers. CCTV showed the owner lifting his dog off the ground by the lead around its neck. He was subsequently charged with offences under the Animal Welfare Act 2006. The owner was acquitted at trial and the dog was returned to him, having been in kennels for approximately 14 months.

A Dog Legislation Officer from the Joint Operations Unit reviewed the case and identified  possible areas for learning and improvement. She indicated that the case was not an isolated one and noted that there had been an increase in dogs being seized, allegedly due to RSPCA resourcing issues. She identified the need to ensure that officers were using the correct powers of seizure, policies were up to date and followed and case files were reviewed in a timely fashion to ensure that dogs were not being retained without good justification. 

Recommendation accepted:

A review of current processes featured as part of the initial complaint handling

Process for review dogs in kennels:
Once a dog enters kennels, after being seized/removed etc, an intake/seizure Form is completed by kennel staff. 
The Intake/Seizure Form contains as much information as possible relating to the dog 
•    Names /breed
•    Date dog entered kennels
•    Reason for seizure 
•    OIC/seizing officer
•    Microchip number (where chipped)

The Form is then emailed to the Dog Legislation Officer (DLO) (JOU) with the information being entered on to a spreadsheet for overview and monitoring. 

Within the above is a section entitled ‘CURRENT STATUS’ in which the DLO can enter free text and updates where necessary.

Where a dog has retained for a period of 30 days or more then the section (within the S/Sheet) that maintains a total the days turns automatically orange altering the DLO who will then undertake a review of the investigation e.g. to make sure advice has been given, if there have been any developments in the investigation etc.

After a period of 60 days the section turns purple enabling the DLOs to identify and monitor long term seizures. 

The DLO is in contact with kennel managers on an almost daily basis - kennel staff will communicate any issues, health problems, behavioural problems etc.

The DLO visits each kennels approx once/twice a month to check on the welfare of the dogs 

Where necessary the DLO will update the animals owners 
It is felt that the above process is already robust and address the aspects of the recommendation as raised.