Complaint investigation summaries

A prisoner complained that the prison was being reluctant to process the competition money they had won at HMP High Down in January 2025. The IPCI investigation found that the prison had already paid the prisoner but had failed to let them know this in their appeal response. Because the prison gave a poor and incorrect response, the prisoner had to take the complaint to IPCI. That part of the complaint was upheld.

The prisoner complained about being placed in handcuffs during an internal move from Reception to the Close Supervision Centre (CSC). The investigation established that the prisoner was a high-risk category A CSC prisoner so the decision to use restraints was both reasonable and policy compliant, although written justification should always be completed.

The prisoner complained that his NOMIS record contained incorrect information about his previous adjudications and criminal offences. HMP Thameside confirmed that there was an error in the recording of one charge and said it could be changed. However, this was not actioned until the investigator contacted them as part of the IPCI investigation. The adjudication information held was correct and did not need to be amended.

The prisoner complained that when he transferred into HMP Rye Hill, he was made to undergo an X-ray Body Scan, despite there being no intelligence to support the need for him to be scanned. In our investigation, IPCI found that HMP Rye Hill was scanning all prisoners arriving at the prison but was not following the relevant policy on cohort scanning by monitoring and discussion at security meetings.

A prisoner complained that the prison had failed to complete a cell clearance certificate and properly audit his property before transfer, and that much of what he had was now missing. The investigation established there was no cell clearance certificate. However the prison had sent on a large amount of bags of unspecified property, which was confirmed to have arrived, and because the prisoner was well above volumetric limits this was in his stored property.

A prisoner complained about a female member of staff assaulting them and making racially motivated slurs. The prison were unable to supply any CCTV or BWVC footage which hampered the investigation. However we established that the incident involved the member of staff pushing a prisoner back into his cell.

A prisoner complained about the delay to his recategorisation. The investigation established that his review was overdue by nearly one month, this was because of pressures on OMU staff.

We investigated a complaint from a prisoner about a statutory letter being returned with no explanation by staff. We established that this was reasonably returned because local policy does not allow for additional enclosures due to weight and size limitations. This was not explained in the complaint response.

A prisoner complained that he was left without functioning sanitation for 2 weeks. Although the IPCI investigation could not establish the exact length of time, it was clear that the prison had taken 7 days to log the fault to be fixed, although it was then fixed promptly.

A prisoner complained that a large amount of property went missing when he transferred from HMP Lincoln to HMP Stocken. The IPCI investigation established that his stored property had not transferred with him, and that several items were recorded as failing to arrive at Stocken. Lincoln was unable to evidence what property had subsequently been sent on.