Unsatisfactory performance 756/2025
FOI Reference: 756/2025
Request
- Please can you tell me, calendar year by calendar year and by rank, how many officers have been placed on unsatisfactory performance & attendance procedures (UPP) over the past 10 years?
- Please can you tell me the outcomes (by number) of these UPP proceedings? Ie warning, final warning, dismissal or No Further Action?
- How many are on UPP now?
- Please can you tell me, calendar year by year and by rank, how many officers have been placed on misconduct proceedings over the past 10 years?
- Please can you tell me the outcomes by number of these misconduct proceedings? Ie warning, final warning, dismissal or No Further Action?
- How many are on misconduct proceedings now?
- Please can you tell me, calendar year by year and by rank, how many officers have been placed on gross misconduct proceedings over the past 10 years?
- Please can you tell me the outcomes by number of these gross misconduct proceedings by calendar year? Ie warning, final warning, dismissal or No Further Action?
- How many are on gross misconduct proceedings now?
Response Q1, Q2 & Q3
I can confirm that Dyfed-Powys Police does not hold the information requested.
Response Q4
I can confirm that Dyfed-Powys Police does hold the information requested; however we are exempting part of that information as we believe that the following exemptions are relevant:
Section 30(1)(a) Investigations and Proceedings conducted by Public Authorities
Section 30(1)(a) is a class-based qualified exemption. This means that the legislators when writing the legislation considered that the release of such information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 would cause harm to the public authority or individual concerned. There is therefore no requirement to carry out a HARM Test in respect of such information.
However, there is a requirement to carry out a Public Interest Test in order to establish whether the public interest in maintaining the exemption may be outweighed by a wider public benefit in disclosure.
Section 30(1)(a) Investigations and Proceedings conducted by Public Authorities:
(1) Information held by a public authority is exempt information if it has at any time been held by the authority for the purposes of -
(a) Any investigation which the public authority has a duty to conduct with a view to it being ascertained (i) whether a person should be charged with an offence, or (ii) whether a person charged with an offence is guilty of it.
Public Interest Test
Considerations favouring disclosure:
Disclosure of the information would improve the public’s knowledge and awareness and would provide satisfaction to the public that these cases are investigated thoroughly and offenders are being dealt with accordingly.
Considerations favouring non-disclosure:
This exemption covers information held at any time for the purpose of an investigation, whether the case is ongoing, closed or abandoned. To release specific details of an ongoing investigation, as in this case, could undermine and prejudice those investigations. This would impact on the forces’ future law enforcement capabilities by hindering the prevention or detection of crime.
Balancing Test
After considering the advantages and disadvantages in disclosure, it falls upon Dyfed-Powys Police to conduct a balance test on the issues. The strongest argument for disclosure, which is public awareness, needs to be weighed against the strongest arguments for non-disclosure, which in this case is that the release would undermine and prejudice ongoing investigations, which would impact on the forces’ future law enforcement capabilities by hindering the prevention or detection of crime.
Therefore, in all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.
Please note: 3 Officers have been removed from the breakdown of information below due to the fact that Section 30 exemption applies.
2015 – 1 x DS
2016 – 1 x DCI, 1 x PS, 1 x PC
2017 – 1 x PC
2018 – 4 x PCs
2019 – 2 x PCs
2020 – 4 x PCs, 1 x DC
2021 – N/A
2022 – 1 x PC
2023 – 1 x PC, 1 x PS
2024 – 1 x DS
2025 – 1 x PS, 4 x PCs
Response Q5
I can confirm that Dyfed-Powys Police does hold the information requested, as outlined below:-
2015 – 1 x other management action
2016 – 1 x written warning & 2 x other management action
2017 – 1 x written warning
2018 – 1 x final written warning & 3 x written warnings
2019 – 1 x final written warning & 1 x written warning
2020 – 1 x final written warning & 4 x final written warnings
2021 – N/A
2022 – 1 x written warning
2023 – 2 x written warnings
2024 – 1 x final written warning
2025 – 1 x dismissal, 3x final written warnings, 2 x written warnings & 2 x other management action.
Response Q6
I can confirm that Dyfed-Powys Police does hold the information requested, as outlined below:-
4 x officers are on misconduct proceedings.
Response Q7
I can confirm that Dyfed-Powys Police does hold the information requested; however we are exempting part of that information as we believe that the following exemptions are relevant:
Section 30(1)(a) Investigations and Proceedings conducted by Public Authorities
Section 30(1)(a) is a class-based qualified exemption. This means that the legislators when writing the legislation considered that the release of such information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 would cause harm to the public authority or individual concerned. There is therefore no requirement to carry out a HARM Test in respect of such information.
However, there is a requirement to carry out a Public Interest Test in order to establish whether the public interest in maintaining the exemption may be outweighed by a wider public benefit in disclosure.
Section 30(1)(a) Investigations and Proceedings conducted by Public Authorities:
(1) Information held by a public authority is exempt information if it has at any time been held by the authority for the purposes of -
(a) Any investigation which the public authority has a duty to conduct with a view to it being ascertained (i) whether a person should be charged with an offence, or (ii) whether a person charged with an offence is guilty of it.
Public Interest Test
Considerations favouring disclosure:
Disclosure of the information would improve the public’s knowledge and awareness and would provide satisfaction to the public that these cases are investigated thoroughly and offenders are being dealt with accordingly.
Considerations favouring non-disclosure:
This exemption covers information held at any time for the purpose of an investigation, whether the case is ongoing, closed or abandoned. To release specific details of an ongoing investigation, as in this case, could undermine and prejudice those investigations. This would impact on the forces’ future law enforcement capabilities by hindering the prevention or detection of crime.
Balancing Test
After considering the advantages and disadvantages in disclosure, it falls upon Dyfed-Powys Police to conduct a balance test on the issues. The strongest argument for disclosure, which is public awareness, needs to be weighed against the strongest arguments for non-disclosure, which in this case is that the release would undermine and prejudice ongoing investigations, which would impact on the forces’ future law enforcement capabilities by hindering the prevention or detection of crime.
Therefore, in all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.
Please note: Officer rank have been removed from the breakdown of information below due to the fact that Section 30 exemption applies.
2015 – 2 x officers (ranks not disclosable)
2016 – 1 x officer (rank not disclosable)
2017 – 2 x PCs & 4 x officers (ranks not disclosable)
2018 – 1 x DC, 1 x PC, 2 x officers (rank not disclosable) & 1 x former PC.
2019 – 1 x former PC & 1 x former officer (rank not disclosable)
2020 – 2 x officers (ranks not disclosable)
2021 – 1 x former PC, 1 x former Special PS, 1 x PC & 1 x officer (rank not disclosable)
2022 – 1 x officer (rank not disclosable) & 1 x PS
2023 – 1 x officer (rank not disclosable) & 1 x former PC
2024 – 2 x former PCs, 1 x PC, 1 x officer (rank not disclosable) & 1 x former officer (rank not disclosable)
2025 – 1 x former PC, 1 x Superintendent & 1 x officer (rank not disclosable).
Response Q8
I can confirm that Dyfed-Powys Police does hold the information requested, as outlined below:-
2015 – 2 x final written warnings
2016 – 1 x final written warning
2017 – 2 x dismissals, 2 x no further action & 2 x other management action
2018 – 3 x dismissals, 1x final written warning & 1 x would have been dismissed if still serving
2019 – 2 x would have been dismissed if still serving
2020 – 1 x dismissal & 1 x final written warning
2021 – 1 x final written warning & 3 x would have been dismissed if still serving
2022 – 1 x dismissal & 1 x written warning
2023 – 1 x final written warning & 1 x would have been dismissed if still serving
2024 – 1 x final written warning, 1 x other management action & 3 x would have been dismissed if still serving
2025 – 1 x dismissal & 2 x would have been dismissed if still serving.
Response Q9
I can confirm that Dyfed-Powys Police does hold the information requested, as outlined below:-
3 x officers are on gross misconduct proceedings.
It should be noted that as a result of the systems adopted by Dyfed-Powys Police in relation to the recording of such information that the information released may or may not be accurate.
(This is a response under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and disclosed on 08/10/2025)
|
Os oes angen y wybodaeth yma arnoch yn Gymraeg, cysylltwch â: If you require this information in Welsh, please contact: |