Response to missing person’s report - Metropolitan Police Service, June 2015
In June 2015 at about 5.30am a man called the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) to report his partner missing. He also raised fears she may be held against her will.
The call was given an E (extended) grade, which does not require a response within an hour. The information about the concerns her life may be in danger was not recorded or conveyed to police colleagues. At 8.30am a member of the public found the woman’s body.
During the investigation we interviewed four staff members under misconduct notice in relation to how the call was handled. We analysed local and national policies related to call grading and record keeping as well as training records for the staff members. We also reviewed recordings of the calls made to the MPS.
At the end of the investigation we were of the opinion that the communication officer who took the phone call may have a case to answer for gross misconduct and that three other police staff members may have a case to answer for misconduct. We also made a number of learning recommendations to the MPS (see below).
The communication officer was given a formal reprimand following a misconduct hearing arranged by the MPS. A second communication officer was to receive refresher training. A supervisor received a warning, and a police constable received management action.
We concluded our investigation in May 2016 but waited until the disciplinary proceedings had fully completed, in early 2019, before publishing its outcomes.
IOPC reference
Recommendations
It is recommended that the MPS ensure that when a call is graded, risks and vulnerability factors are prioritised over officer response time.
Do you accept the recommendation?
Yes
Accepted action:
Risk and vulnerability are already primary factors in assessing a call and its grading. The increased level of vulnerability (identified) would lead to a higher priority grading.
It is recommended that the MPS consider the deployment of officers to an informant’s current location (if they are not at home) when a missing person incident is graded as a ‘Immediate’ or a ‘Significant’.
Do you accept the recommendation?
Yes
Accepted action:
Standard operating procedures are that where a missing person report is immediate or significant graded then a face to face report will be taken from the informant at the informants' location, if this is outside of the MPS footprint then a request will be sent to the police force covering that geographical area to take this report.
It is recommended that the MPS consider the need for despatch operators to review the Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) when information is acknowledged to ensure that they are aware of the context of the information.
Do you accept the recommendation?
Yes
Accepted action:
When a CAD requires an acknowledgement the Despatch Operators are trained to review any new information placed on the CAD to ensure new risk or vulnerability is not missed.
It is recommended that the MPS consider the need to remind despatch operators of their collective responsibility to highlight or challenge the grade of a call if required.
Do you accept the recommendation?
Yes
Accepted action:
This form part of the Despatch Operator training that a target response time grade can be reviewed and when necessary changed where risk has been identified, or the criteria for a grade change are met in accordance with police notice 44/2012.