This blog post exposes a particularly dangerous form of police misconduct: officers claiming powers they do not lawfully possess, especially the misuse of Section 17 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) to force entry into private homes. It explains that while police do have limited powers to enter premises without a warrant in strictly defined emergency circumstances, these powers are frequently exaggerated or abused to justify unlawful intrusions, routine “welfare checks,” and intimidation of occupants. Such behaviour, if left unchecked, represents a serious erosion of civil liberties and privacy, normalised within police culture and often misunderstood by the public.
Content Authenticity Statement
100% of this week’s blog post was generated by me, the human.
Police Forcing Entry Without a Warrant: When It’s Legal – And When It’s an Abuse of Power
“The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I’m from the Government, and I’m here to help.”
Ronald Regan, US President, 1986
Police Abuse of Power and the Hidden Dangers of Fake Legal Authority
The primary purpose of this blog post is to highlight Police abuse of power and to show how it can be combatted and its victims compensated.
The Most Insidious Form of Police Misconduct: Claiming Powers That Don’t Exist
Perhaps the most egregious, and certainly the most insidious, form of Police misconduct relates not to Police abusing the powers that they actually possess – but committing a kind of knowing fraud upon the public by purporting to have powers which do not in fact exist at all.
I describe this as perhaps the worst misconduct, because it is so widespread and tolerated, even deliberately encouraged, in Policing culture. Such malpractices would, if they were allowed to stand unchallenged/unchecked would constitute a disastrous encroachment upon our civil liberties, both in terms of our personal freedom and the privacy of our homes.
Common Examples of Police Overreach and Misuse of Legal Powers
Examples of this form of overreach of Police power include –
- Police Officers claiming to have the right to detain you prior to a full/formal arrest
- Police Officers invoking a right of forced entry to your home, under Section 17(1)(e) of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE), not to ‘save life or limb’ but to carry out what, at its highest, is not a matter of life and death, but a ‘welfare check’.
Misuse of Section 17 PACE and Illegal ‘Welfare Check’ Raids
It is the latter of those two forms of almost ‘daily’ Police misconduct which I will be addressing in this blog post.
Can the Police enter your home without a warrant?
Many people at first assume, incorrectly, that the answer to this question is “no”. When Police Officers bang at their front door, the resident demands to see the judicial warrant which they presume the Police require in order to enter to either search the property or arrest someone on the premises.
But actually, Police raids carried out under Court warrants are in the minority; the majority of times that Police turn up at houses demanding entry and threatening ‘the big red key’ – i.e. a battering ram – they are using or purporting to use free- standing powers granted to them by the Police and Criminal Evidence Act.
Section 17 and Section 18 PACE Explained: When Forced Entry Is Lawful
Police Officers are granted powers under Sections 17 and 18 of PACE in order to allow them to enter premises without a warrant and without the owner’s consent, in certain specified circumstances, as follows –
- Arresting a person for a criminal offence [S.17 (1) (b) & (c)] – although most offences which can only be tried at the Magistrates Court, rather than the higher- level Crown Court, are excluded
- Arresting a person who has failed to answer bail [S.17 (1) (c)]
- Recapturing a prisoner or ‘escaped’ arrestee[S.17 (1) (c) & (d)]
- Saving life or limb [S.17 (1) (e)] – but not to carry out a non- emergency “welfare check”
- Preventing serious damage to property [S.17 (1) (e)]
- To conduct a search following an occupier’s arrest [S.18 (1)] – although the Police will be strictly liable if they get the wrong house, even if they had reasons to think it was the right one.
The Police do not need judicial authority, they do not need a Court warrant to exercise those powers – but what they do need, in order to exercise any of the Section 17 powers, is an honest and objectively reasonable suspicion that the condition relied upon pertains i.e that they will find the person they are looking for, or that somebody really is at risk of imminent death or serious injury.
When Section 17 Becomes a Fake Power Used to Invade Private Lives
It is therefore a power that should only be invoked in extremis – but time and time again in my career I have seen the Police claiming to be able to use Section 17 in the most banal of circumstances – in order to ‘investigate’ an argument or domestic dispute, or to carry out a non- specific ‘welfare check’ on the occupants.
In other words, it becomes a fake power which the Police claim to have when they want to stick their boots through people’s front doors and noses into people’s private lives.
I have been called upon on many occasions to assist those who have suffered from unlawful Police intrusions into their house under purported Section 17 powers of entry, and I will set out below a case study about one such claim which I have very recently concluded.
Case study of an Illegal Section 17 Police Raid
On an ordinary morning in July 2021, my clients Michael and Danielle were home together at Danielle’s house in Birmingham – rented only in her name but where Michael commonly resides, the couple being in a long-term relationship and having a number of young children together.
An Officer of West Midlands Police, PC Slepertas, attended at the premises in order to carry out a ‘welfare check’ on the couple’s young daughter.
Danielle answered the door to the Officer, but did not open it fully and did not grant him entry into the house, as she had just come out of the shower and was only in a bathrobe. She therefore explained to PC Slepertas that this was a bad time and asked if he could come back later that day.
However, PC Slepertas refused to leave, causing Michael, who had overheard the conversation between his partner and the Officer to intervene. Michael approached the front door and said to the Officer “Are you deaf – can’t you hear what she said? Can’t you see she isn’t dressed?” Michael then swiftly shut the front door and a brief exchange of words took place between Michael and Danielle.
Neither Michael nor Danielle wanted the Officer to enter the house at that time and nor did he have any power to force entry – as a generic welfare check (borne as it happens, on this occasion, out of misplaced concerns by the child’s school, logged a week earlier after the girl had been late for school “and this was out of character”) does not constitute a ‘life or limb’ emergency.
Rather than leaving, however, PC Slepertas hung around outside the house, and once Danielle had got dressed and left the premises with her daughter PC Slepertas approached and attempted to engage with Danielle. Danielle again explained that this was a bad time, as she and her daughter were running late, and she did not want to speak to the Officer. Danielle and her daughter therefore continued on their journey.
PC Slepertas subsequently made a statement of events in which he recorded the following information, describing his encounter with Danielle and her daughter outside the house –
“I made an assessment of the child’s appearance and wellbeing as that was the initial reason for me to be at the location. [She] looks very happy, well dressed, clean and well fed”.
But PC Slepertas was not prepared to let matters rest there, and returned to the station. As it was made clear by his subsequent actions, recorded in his statement and on his own body camera, PC Slepertas was clearly unhappy about Michael’s attitude and wanted to enter the house to speak to him – I presume to challenge him, tell him off, or otherwise interrogate him – despite not actually having any power to do so.
How Police Manufactured a ‘Life or Limb’ Emergency
PC Slepertas therefore, when he called for back up from his Police colleagues, framed the situation in the following terms – he sought to argue that the ‘raised voices’ he had heard between Michael and Danielle, immediately after the door was shut in his face, and the fact that he had not subsequently seen Michael emerging from the house, had given rise to a concern on his part that Michael had somehow been injured.
This argument was indeed as ropy and threadbare as it sounds. PC Slepertas’ alleged concern for Michael’s ‘life or limb’ was entirely based on the fact that in the relatively brief time that had passed since the initial incident, he had not seen or heard from Michael– hardly surprising, of course, as the man clearly didn’t want anything to do with the Officer loitering outside the house.
However, PC Slepertas and his colleagues now effectively manufactured a situation in which they were purporting to have concern that Michael was either dead or seriously injured in order to justify using Section 17 powers to smash open the family’s front door.
This was a gross misrepresentation of the facts, and a gross distortion of the power that the Police actually have in such a situation.
Clearly, however, PC Slepertas was determined not to have his authority infringed – and called upon the considerable force of West Midlands Police to “lay siege” to Michael’s castle; for what was, at its highest, a little bit of intemperate rudeness on Michael’s part.
Battering Rams & Taser Guns: But Are You Feeling Safe & Well?
Approximately 10 minutes after she had left the house, Danielle received a phone call from the Police asking that she return home, as it was said that the Police were concerned about the welfare of Michael. Danielle was totally confused by this sudden change of tack, the Police having originally told her they were there for a welfare check on her daughter – and replied that Michael was fine.
Michael was indeed fine, he had gone into the back garden of the premises and was talking to a neighbour over the garden fence.
Michael then returned inside the house, and was upstairs when he heard loud banging noises coming from the front of the property. He came to the top of the stairs in a state of semi-undress (wearing only boxer shorts and a t-shirt) and to his shock witnessed the front door of the house being smashed in by a battering ram, and numerous Police Officers, including PC Slepertas, storming into the house and shouting aggressively at him.
One of the Officers, who was holding a drawn taser gun, immediately issued taser threats and shouted at Michael to put his hands behind his back.
Another Officer then raced up the stairs to where Michael was standing and pushed him down into a sitting position on the stairs. The Officer with the taser gun then ‘red dotted’ Michael’s chest i.e targeted him with the weapon’s laser sights, the last precursor to firing – whilst the other Officer commenced handcuffing him.
PC Slepertas then announced that he was going to“do” (i.e. search) “the house”. During this search – which was entirely unlawful and had no defined object or purpose, but which included the Officers going into bedrooms and looking in cupboards, PC Slepertas telephoned his Sergeant (who was back at the Police Station) and confirmed that the reason for “putting the door in” was to carry out a “safe and well” check on Michael.
Meanwhile, two Officers led Michael down the stairs, holding his arms, and completed handcuffing his arms behind his back.
In response to Michael’s question as to what the “problem” was, the taser armed Officer replied-
“The problem is you haven’t come to the door, have you sir, and spoke to us”.
Michael quite fairly queried whether this was a crime, and the taser Officer, falsely and shamelessly, asserted that it was.
Unlawful Search, Detention, and Intimidation Without Arrest
Multiple Officers then commenced a search of the house, upstairs and downstairs, whilst Michael was kept captive in handcuffs upon the stairs. The Officers refused Michael’s reasonable request to be allowed to finish dressing (put his trousers on) and repeatedly berated him for ‘not answering the door’.
Having completed his illegal search of the house (remember, that even on the Police’s version of events, they were only here to save Michael’s life and limb, not to arrest anyone or search for anything), PC Slepertas returned to speak to the ‘prisoner.’
Whilst another Officer held Michael’s shoulder (despite the fact that Michael was offering absolutely no resistance to the Officers, and was already handcuffed) PC Slepertas lectured him as follows, asserting that the reason why his door had “been kicked in” was as follows –
“For all I know, you two have had an argument, and you could be at the bottom of the stairs not breathing… We need to know you’re alive. You after 20 minutes of trying didn’t give us any response. Therefore we’ve used Section 17 of PACE to know that you are alive and well”.
After approximately 15 minutes, the Officers removed Michael’s handcuffs and exited the premises. At no point did the Officers purport to arrest Michael for any offence, despite the fact that they were manifestly detaining him in handcuffs.
In Summary: When it Comes to Police Trespass, Section 17 is the Last Refuge of the Scoundrel
The Police can force entry to houses, without a court warrant, in the specific circumstances defined by Sections 17 and 18 of PACE, but what they cannot do is –
- Force entry because you are refusing to speak to them.
- Assume you are dead because you have had an argument with your wife.
- Force entry to carry out a “safe and well”/ welfare/ general “wellbeing” check.
- Imprison you and search your house, after entering in order to “save” you.
That will not, however, stop a lot of Police Officers doing exactly that, and then shouting about “Section 17” in order to browbeat and bamboozle the public, and disguise their illegal actions.
Know your rights, and seek legal advice if this happens to you.
How I Was Able to Help Michael and Danielle & What You Can Do If This Happens To You
Unfortunately, the Officers had not finished with Danielle and Michael that day. They later returned, as Danielle was returning to the house with the couple’s daughter, and re-entered, although they did not need to force entry this time – the door still hanging off its hinges from the first time.
The Officers, led by PC Slepertas now announced that they had decided that Michael needed to leave the house because of what they called his earlier ‘domestic’ with Danielle – the argument at the door – and although Danielle made it clear that she did not support this, they then arrested Michael for “breach of the peace” when he refused to leave.
Thus did an incident which began with an unlawful Police trespass, culminate in an unlawful arrest.
Michael and Danielle both brought Police complaints about how they had been treated, and both complaints were investigated and rejected by West Midlands Police Professional Standards Department (PSD). In particular, PSD wrote to Danielle asserting that “entry was lawfully forced [to your house] under Section 17 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act.”
As Police PSD units habitually act, not as open-minded arbiters of public complaints, but as the ‘first line of defence’ against claims, this came as no surprise to me; and was an illustration of how admissions of Police wrongdoing are hard to come by, even in the face of glaring evidence, and why it is always best if you instruct an expert Police claims solicitor to represent you, if this happens.
Holding the Police to Account: Compensation for Illegal Police Raids
Thankfully, Michael and Danielle had me, acting on their behalf by way of a no win, no fee agreement. In response to the detailed letters of claim which I sent on their behalf, West Midlands Police Legal Services department now admitted that the first entry into the couple’s home (when the door had been forced) –
“was not a lawful exercise of Section 17 PACE powers and hence constituted a breach of Article 8 ECHR [i.e the right to private and family life under the European Convention on Human Rights] and trespass to land.”
They also admitted that the handcuffing of Michael, and pointing of tasers at him during that first entry constituted acts of unlawful assault/ battery, although they disputed other aspects of the claim.
West Midlands Police then offered my clients combined damages of £2,500 (without legal costs). This is another fine example of why in a claim like this you should always seek specialist legal representation. I confidently advised Michael and Danielle to reject this offer, and after bringing Court proceedings, was able to conclude the couples’ claim for combined damages of £19,000 plus legal costs.
Know Your Rights and Challenge Police Trespass
So, returning to the quotation with which I began this blog post, remember what the nine most terrifying words in the language are for English Police Forces –
“I’m Iain Gould, and I’m here to sue you.”
My clients’ names have been changed.
How you can help
Every post on this blog is grounded in real cases, real experience, and a commitment to holding abuses of power to account. If you’ve taken something useful from this article, or if you wish to support that broader aim, I’d be grateful if you could leave a 5, yes 5-star review. Each review strengthens this work and helps others in need of straightforward, specialist expertise find their way here. Thank you.
Contact the Expert Police Misconduct Solicitor
Iain Gould is a solicitor specialising in complaints, claims and civil actions against the Police. With over 30 years of experience and a national reputation, he has successfully sued all 43 police forces in England and Wales challenging abuse of power and securing rightful compensation.
You must be logged in to post a comment.