Second financial assistance application

The Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime is asked to approve the second application for financial assistance made by the Applicants for the sum of £8,047.17 (exclusive of VAT) for the reasons set out in Part 2.

The DMPC has power to grant the application of £8,047.17 (exclusive of VAT) if she is satisfied that funding the Applicants legal expenses in the proceedings is likely to secure an efficient and effective police force

The Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime (DMPC) is asked to consider an application for funding in the sum of £8,047.17 (exclusive of VAT) for serving officers in respect of separate representation at an inquest.

1. Introduction and background

1.1. These proceedings concern the representation of MPS officers at inquest proceedings. This is the second application

1.2. The Applicants represents that they satisfy the criteria for entitlement to financial assistance namely: that they were performing their official duties; that they were acting in good faith, and that they exercised reasonable judgement. The facts provided by the Applicants in support of their representation for financial assistance are set out in the exempt report.

1.3. The Commissioner’s position in relation to the Applicants representations for financial assistance are also set out in the exempt report.

2. Issues for consideration

2.1. For the DMPC to consider whether there is a conflict of interest requiring separate representation and financial assistance and whether the financial assistance will secure an efficient and effective Police Service.

3. Financial Comments

3.1. The cost of these legal fees, if authorised, will be met from the 1996 Police Act Expenditure budget within the MPS Directorate of Legal Services’ budget.

4. Legal Comments

4.1. The DMPC has a discretion under Section 3(6) and para. 7 of Schedule 3 of the

Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 to fund police officers’ legal expenses in proceedings if they consider that providing the funding secures the maintenance of an efficient and effective police force. The Deputy Mayor has delegated authority, under para. 4.10 of the Scheme of Delegation, to consider the current application for financial assistance.

4.2. A conflict of interest arises between the Commissioner and the Police Officers which gave rise to the need for separate representation and financial assistance for the reasons set out in the exempt report

4.3. Home Office Circular 010/2017 provides guidance which applies to MOPAC. In conclusion it states:

4.4. “…police officers and staff must be confident that local policing bodies will provide financial assistance, whether in full or part, for officers facing legal proceedings where they have acted in good faith and have exercised their judgement reasonably”.

5. GDPR and Data Privacy

5.1. The processing of personal data has been minimised as part of this decision and is held within Part 2 of the report.

6. Equality Comments

6.1. To continue policing with the consent of the population is serves, the police will always seek to treat everyone fairly and openly. Race or equality issues do appear to have an impact in this matter but it is important to note that there have been no findings of misconduct based on any equality issue. However, the MPS does not discount inferences that may be made from this incident.

7. Background/supporting papers

7.1. Part 2 of this Report is exempt because it falls within an exemption specified in para 2(2) of the Elected Local Policing Bodies (Specified Information) Order 2011 and/or under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, e.g. because the information amounts to personal data, is confidential or commercially sensitive.