Byzantine' regulations governing overtime claims
Freedom of information request reference no: 01.FOI.23.034656
I note you seek access to the following information:
The following paragraph is from a misconduct hearing concerning an officer who was cleared of submitting a claim for overtime to which he was not entitled (I have not included a link for obvious reasons):
'The Panel finds that the parties agree that the Regulations dealing with police officers' entitlements with respect to overtime are as submitted by the AA byzantine and far from easy to understand.'
1. Please provide information created by the MPS commenting on the complexity of the Regulations. I have in mind high-level information such as a report in which the 'byzantine' problem referred to was considered.
2. Please provide the number of officers in 2022/23 who were found to have claimed expenses they were not entitled to. Of this number, please provide the number found to have been dishonest.
Decision
I have today decided to disclose the located information to you in full.
Please find below information pursuant to your request above.
Q1 - Please provide information created by the MPS commenting on the complexity of the Regulations. I have in mind high-level information such as a report in which the 'byzantine' problem referred to was considered.
This information is not held but please note the explanation below:
In this instance the panel were simply saying that the overtime regulations are complex. Submitted means submissions which could be oral submissions made during the course of proceedings. It is not uncommon for parties to agree on points during the course of proceedings. There is no separate report on the complexity of the regulations. Our understanding is it was simply agreed by all parties that they are complex during the course of these proceedings.
Police regulations in terms of entitlements to overtime are set out in publically searchable documents such as the police regulations 2003 at the below link:
Q2 - Please provide the number of officers in 2022/23 who were found to have claimed expenses they were not entitled to. Of this number, please provide the number found to have been dishonest.
There were five officers with a case to answer for misuse of allowance. These were all related to expenses.