Recurring concern

Unreliable recording of safety-critical police incident locations

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

First reported 27 Nov 2023•Latest report 30 Mar 2026

Definition

What this concern includes

Includes failures in police processes or systems to record, update, verify or preserve precise locations associated with safety-critical incidents, offences, searches or operational activity when inaccurate or missing location information can impair risk linkage, deployment, investigation or follow-up.

Not included

  • Excludes general police crime-recording failures where the specific deficiency is not the recording or verification of safety-critical locations.
  • Excludes generic clinical, premises or non-police location records.
  • Excludes failures to conduct searches or investigations when the relevant location information was accurately recorded and available.
  • Excludes generic communication, training or documentation deficiencies unless they directly impair recording or verification of safety-critical police incident locations.
Reports
2

Distinct published reports

Individual concerns
2

A report can raise multiple concerns

Date range
2023–2026

First to latest report issue date

Stated actions
6

Described in published responses

Reports over time

Reports over time

Reports about this concern issued each year.

* 2026 is projected from reports observed to 7 Sep 2026.

Most frequent recipients

Most frequent recipients

Reports about this concern sent to each recipient.

Cleveland Police1
Derbyshire Constabulary1
Home Office1

Concerns and responses across reports

Only concerns grouped under this recurring concern are included. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. Teesside and Hartlepool

    AI-generated summary

    Grant Nicholas LOWRY · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Grant Nicholas LOWRY left home on 1 June 2022 after sending a text indicating suicidal intent and was found deceased in the early hours of 3 June 2022 following an uncoordinated search. Concerns included inaccurate and incomplete recording of search information, communication failures, delayed requests for additional search resources, and inadequate operational equipment for one officer. The inquest found that missed opportunities in mental health care and the search deficiencies contributed to the circumstances surrounding his death.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to accurately record search locations and outcomes

    Wider context from the report

    “There were issues with communication and record keeping which impacted on the quality and effectiveness of the searches undertaken. Some prevented re-tasking of further and full searches of the heat sources, to include: 1. The location of the first NPAS heat source was not recorded accurately. 2. The outcome of the search into the first NPAS heat source was not recorded accurately by the Officers involved or the call handler, whether in an Officer's day book, or on the STORM log, OEL or CAD. This prevented re-tasking of a search at that area. 3. The details of the second NPAS heat source were not heeded, whether by the Officers at Summerhill Park, the call handler or listening Supervision. This meant the heat source was not searched or recorded. 4. There was no liaison between Hartlepool and Stockton officers during the search at Summerhill Park on the evening of 01.06.22. This contributed to an unorganised and uncoordinated search. 5. There was inaccurate recording of which fields around ████████ had been searched, which was relied upon by Supervision and prevented later searches of those areas. 6. The family were told that no heat sources had been identified by NPAS. 7. There were delays in requesting Polsa Mutual Aid from neighbouring police forces. 8. There were delays in requesting the involvement of Mountain Rescue( with their dogs) and the police dog unit. In addition, the officer who was guided by NPAS to the first heat source did not have a full set of operational PPE for a search at night time in a dense area. The batteries on his torch and work mobile phone were flat. ”

    Source location

    Grant Nicholas LOWRY · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Share search-related organisational learning and recording requirements with staff, the Search portfolio lead, and specialist training governance.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Actions taken to address these concerns are as follows: The feedback and organisational learning set out in the statement provided by Greater Manchester Police (GMP) has been shared with staff via the force’s Specialist Training Tactical Governance Group. This group is responsible for ensuring that specialist training is identified and delivered through the force’s mandatory or annual training schedule, and that appropriate training is delivered to support operational requirements. The learning from GMP’s feedback has also been provided to the force lead for the Search portfolio, and includes prioritisation of the requirement to record:”

    Source location

    Response from Cleveland Police
    Page 2 · response
    Published 7 April 2026

    Open published response

  2. Derby and Derbyshire

    AI-generated summary

    Gracie Elizabeth Spinks · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Gracie Elizabeth Spinks was unlawfully killed by a former work colleague on 18 June 2021, dying from a stab wound to the neck. The report describes serious police failings in investigating her stalking complaint and in dealing with a rucksack containing weapons, and raises concerns about stalking investigations, risk assessments, record keeping, dangerous items found in the community, and the availability of independent stalking advocates.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to individually record all stalking offence locations

    Wider context from the report

    “3. Independent Office for Police Conduct (“IOPC”) – the IOPC carried out an investigation into the conduct of the five officers involved in the stalking investigation and the rucksack incident. The IOPC made a number of recommendations to Derbyshire Constabulary which included: ‘2. To consider how stalking offence locations are recorded on Niche. There does not appear to be any guidance to suggest that all of the locations of the stalking offending are tagged to the incident individually. In this instance it may not have made any difference as the officers who received the bag did not do a search of police systems for the area. However, in future that may well be done, and it could make the difference between linking risk and suspects.’ I heard evidence about this issue from the Detective Chief Superintendent on behalf of the Constabulary and I am concerned that more needs to be done to engage with this specific recommendation from the IOPC. The inquest heard that specific geographical locations can be particularly important in stalking investigations (i.e the horse field in Gracie’s case). As such, it seems to me that the IOPC recommendation is an important one which could assist in future cases with linking suspects and particular locations relevant to the stalking investigation. ”

    Source location

    Gracie Elizabeth Spinks · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 3 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Refresh stalking training content to cover risk indicators, reasonable enquiries, pattern analysis, ongoing risk assessment and record keeping.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “As a force, we are committed to improving our staff’s understanding and identification of stalking and vulnerability. Since the inquest, we have reviewed and refreshed the content of our training on stalking as part of the force’s vulnerability programme. This emphasises to our officers and staff the risk indicators of stalking behaviour and the importance of pursuing all reasonable lines of enquiry. A focus is also placed on the importance of broadening intelligence parameters to include multiple locations to assess cumulative risk, and that officers should undertake ongoing risk assessments throughout the course of an investigation and keep accurate records.”

    Source location

    Response from Derbyshire Constabulary
    Page 1 · response
    Published 1 December 2023

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Review stalking resources and issue messages raising staff awareness of their availability for investigations.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “A full review of the force’s available resources on stalking was undertaken in December 2023, updating key points on multiple locations being assessed to identify potential patterns in a suspect’s behaviour. More specific messages have been issued to officers and staff, raising awareness of the availability of these resources to aid and inform investigations.”

    Source location

    Response from Derbyshire Constabulary
    Page 2 · response
    Published 1 December 2023

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Publish a stalking policy and supporting standard operating procedure with investigation checklists and expectations for pattern analysis and reasonable enquiries.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “To formalise the existing guidance on stalking, Derbyshire Constabulary is due to publish a new stalking policy in February 2024. The policy has been reviewed, amended and sent out for consultation with key stakeholders across Contact Management, Divisional and Crime functions across the force. We have drawn upon and used best practice from other forces to formulate the policy. The policy specifically sets out the expectations required in response to stalking, supported by a standard operating procedure that provides clarity on the working practices and processes to be followed. This will include a specific checklist for officers to consider as part of the investigation strategy, including wider pattern analysis, multiple offence locations and the importance of adopting an ‘investigative mindset’ when pursuing all reasonable lines of enquiry.”

    Source location

    Response from Derbyshire Constabulary
    Page 2 · response
    Published 1 December 2023

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Introduce Niche functionality enabling multiple stalking offence locations to be linked and communicate the change to force staff.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In 2016, Derbyshire Constabulary adopted Niche as its Crime Management System. It is used across the force for investigation and case management, safeguarding referrals, intelligence submissions, property management and custody management. To ensure we can identify patterns and trends, the system relies on data being flagged or linked. Prior to December 2023 the force had been unable to link multiple locations to a crime report, due to a lack of functionality. However, following the recommendation made by the IOPC the force has worked with Niche and other police forces to introduce this functionality, which is now available following a system upgrade. These changes took effect in November 2023 and notification of this has been communicated to the force via the Chief’s Orders, a circular, on 11th December 2023 and reiterated in January 2024, on the force intranet.”

    Source location

    Response from Derbyshire Constabulary
    Page 4 · response
    Published 1 December 2023

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Replace the command and control system with capability to tag multiple locations and improve automated intelligence for risk assessment.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In addition, the force’s command and control system, which records calls for service, dispatches officers and records attendance, is due to be replaced in July 2025. The new system will provide new capability across our telephony and command and control functions, including the ability to tag multiple locations. Its automated intelligence functions have improved capability, providing a greater amount of information to inform risk assessments, identifying more effectively repeat callers and locations without the need to search multiple systems. In the meantime, intelligence officers support call handlers, through assessing information linked to wider locations, as part of an incident’s initial intelligence assessment.”

    Source location

    Response from Derbyshire Constabulary
    Page 4 · response
    Published 1 December 2023

    Open published response
Back to top

Data last updated 7 September 2026