Breach of Bail, Breach of Rights – But Who’s To Blame?

This week’s blog concerns my client Vincent, and another illustration of how finding the culprit who is legally liable to compensate you for a wrongful arrest can be complicated, even when the underlying facts are straightforward. 

Vincent was on bail, one of the conditions of which was to not enter a specified “exclusion zone”, and this was being monitored by an electronic tag which my client had to wear at all times, and keep charged. The Electronic Monitoring Service (EMS) were responsible for reporting any breaches to the Police.   

In April 2024, Vincent was arrested by the Police for allegedly breaching his bail conditions by having twice entered the exclusion zone. Whilst he was in custody, a technical third ‘breach’ occurred, because the electronic tag ran out of power – this is known as a “battery breach” although in the circumstances, Vincent clearly had a good excuse for that! He subsequently appeared before Bolton Magistrates’ Court, where all three ‘breaches’ were dealt with, and thereafter fully abided by his conditions. 

My client was therefore startled to receive an early morning home visit by Police Officers, at his home address in Greater Manchester, in May 2024. The Officers arrested him for the same three “breaches of bail” as before (including the “battery breach”). 

Vincent’s protests that he had already been arrested and dealt with for these breaches (and that the third had only occurred because he was in custody for the first two) were ignored, with the normal mix of disinterest and inflexibility which accompanies officers on a ‘mission’ like this. 

On the Custody Record which was opened for Vincent at Bolton Police Station, the circumstances of arrest were stated to be as follows: 

“WM [Wanted Male] on PNC [Police National Computer]  for breach of court bail.  Failed to comply with electronically monitored exclusion zone.  EMS [Electronic Monitoring Service] battery not charged.” 

Vincent was processed and then incarcerated in a cell for several hours before being transported to Ashton-under-Lyne Magistrates’ Court in handcuffs. 

It was not until mid- afternoon that my client appeared before the court, whereupon the mistake was identified and he was immediately released. 

Vincent was clearly the victim of a miscarriage of justice, but who was to blame? The Police have the power to arrest in such circumstances under Section 7(3)(b) of the Bail Act 1976 and can themselves avoid liability in such cases, if they can show they were exercising their power of arrest in regards to facts which, though mistaken, they reasonably believed to be true – 

“A person who has been released on bail in criminal proceedings and is under a duty to surrender to the custody of a court may be arrested without a warrant by a constable if the constable…has reasonable grounds for suspecting that the person has broken any of those conditions.” 

The potential culprits in this matter were therefore – 

• The Magistrates Court staff (i.e the Ministry of Justice) who had dealt with Vincent’s breach of bail hearing in April.
• Greater Manchester Police, who had carried out the May arrest.
• EMS, the Electronic Monitoring Service. 

GMP rapidly denied liability, relying, as expected, on the provisions of the Bail Act. They stated that on the day of my client’s arrest in May, the PNC was still showing Vincent as “wanted” and there was no indication that the bail offences had been dealt with. 

A further complexity was also added to the picture, as GMP revealed that they themselves knew nothing about the initial arrest in April – it turned out that the officers on that occasion had come from Lancashire Constabulary. 

Remember that our system of county- based regional Police Forces (with their roots in the traditional ‘shire’ system of local government going back to the Middle Ages) means that if the Police do you wrong, there is no central government Defendant with whom the ‘buck stops’. You must identify and sue the Chief Constable of the particular Force whose Officers are at fault. 

I would suggest that having a system whereby the Home Office bears ultimate responsibility for all torts and breaches of the law by Police Officers of any Force would likely lead to a considerable saving of time and legal costs – as the ‘phoney wars’ waged by Police Forces trying to blame each other, to the frustration of the Claimant in cases like this – could be simply and neatly avoided. But this blog is about the law as it is; not how we would wish it to be. 

In a similar fashion to the Police, EMS is not, in itself, a central entity which can be sued – it is the name of a government franchise which is contracted out to private bidders, and it is the private company which must be sued directly. In this case, Vincent’s original arrest in April had occurred when the EMS contract was held by Capita Ltd – but by the time of his second arrest in May, the service had been transferred into the hands of Serco Ltd. 

This is a case, therefore, in which letters of claim had to be presented to not one, but five potential Defendants – the Ministry of Justice, GMP, Lancashire Police, Capita and Serco. 

The full picture then had to be assembled out of the ‘jigsaw pieces’ of the various documents disclosed by EMS and the Police in response to the claim, and as a result of that evidence it became clear that fault lay with the original arresting Force, Lancashire, for failing to update EMS and the PNC correctly, after the breach of bail hearing in April. 

I am pleased to confirm that I have now settled Vincent’s case for a payment of £3,000 damages, plus legal costs. 

If you have suffered a wrongful arrest in similar circumstances, please contact me for expert advice and representation – I will guide you through the maze of case-law, legislation, and multiple, often obstructive Defendants, to win the compensation to which you are entitled. If in breaching you for bail, they’ve breached your rights, leave it to me – I’ll find out who’s to blame. 

My client’s name has been changed. 

Week after week, I post on this blog, in order to share my knowledge and experience so that people can better understand their rights and options. If this blog has helped you, or if you believe in the general importance of holding the police to account, please take a moment to leave a 5 star review. Your review is more than just feedback – it is a way to guide others towards expert representation when they need it most. Thank you!