In 2019, my client, John Richards and his ex-partner, Helen were engaged in Family Court proceedings concerning their son. Helen had made an application to vary a Child Arrangements Order and she had sought, and been granted, an ex parte Non-Molestation Order against John.
In September 2019, John was arrested by West Midlands police officers in respect of a false allegation that he had breached the Non-Molestation Order. He was bailed to return to the police station a month later.
On or about 18th October 2019, John was notified that bail was cancelled and that no further action would be taken.
In February 2020, John attended Birmingham County Court for the ongoing family court proceedings. He had not had contact with his son since late August 2019. It was not a final hearing but John reasonably understood that he would be granted some form of immediate contact with his son.
During the course of the hearing it became apparent that John’s PNC (Police National Computer) record was inaccurate in that it recorded that he had accepted a caution for breach of the Non-Molestation Order.
John disputed that he had accepted any such caution.
The court adjourned the hearing until May 2020 and ordered amongst other things that John should file and serve a letter confirming the outcome of the police investigation following the alleged breach of the Non-Molestation Order in October 2019.
The Court declined to allow any contact between John and his son, pending the next hearing in May 2020.
Upon leaving the Court, John went to West Midlands Police HQ to enquire how to challenge the PNC entry. He was directed to Birmingham Central police station, where he was told that he must have accepted the caution for that to be on the PNC. Upon returning to Police HQ, he was advised to dispute the entry in writing.
John wrote to West Midlands Police requesting an explanation as to why the caution appeared on his PNC record and a request that the caution be deleted.
West Midlands Police subsequently confirmed that the caution had been added incorrectly to the PNC by “administrative error” and that steps had been taken to rectify the record and remove the caution.
I brought a claim on behalf of John. Despite the strength of the claim, West Midlands Police failed to admit liability, and such that it was necessary to issue court proceedings. In due course, West Midlands Police agreed to pay my client significant compensation for this data breach together with his costs.
You must be logged in to post a comment.