WIREDGOV

The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) has yesterday issued its findings from an investigation into how Devon & Cornwall Police interacted with Valan Pitts (also known as Chang Somers) prior to his body being discovered in Paignton, Devon in 2012. 

The investigation considered a series of calls received within the police control room, some from Mr Somers in the days prior to his death and some received from his family following his disappearance.  It also reviewed the police missing person enquiry.

The IPCC investigation identified a number of individual failings by several members of police control room staff who either handled calls poorly or failed to take the appropriate action.

In days prior to his disappearance in July 2012, Mr Somers, 36, a vulnerable adult from Plymouth had several interactions with, and made several calls to, police. On 25 July a member of the public in Paignton reported seeing a man outside his flat who appeared to be taking tablets. Mr Somers’ family formally reported him as missing on 31 July and his body was found on 22 August 2012, a short distance away from the location of the earlier report in Paignton.

The IPCC investigation concluded last year but issuing findings has awaited an inquest. At an inquest in Plymouth yesterday a jury concluded the death was accidental.

As a result of the IPCC investigation, four members of control room staff were disciplined by Devon & Cornwall Police. At the conclusion of disciplinary proceedings held by the force, two resource deployment officers received a final written warning and two more got written warnings. The IPCC also recommended a case to answer for misconduct against a call handler who has since resigned from the force. The IPCC found no misconduct by a control room supervisor, but recommended he should be subject to unsatisfactory performance procedures.

IPCC Associate Commissioner, Tom Milsom, said: “Mr Somers was a vulnerable person who made and had several contacts with the police over a period of time when his mental health was clearly deteriorating. Several officers and police staff in the control room came into contact with Mr Somers. Some recognised his vulnerability and sought to pass on messages and give him reassurance. Others completely missed the signs that were there and did not recognise and share information effectively.

“There was a lack of mental health awareness among call handlers and, in some cases, a lack of politeness and respect afforded to Mr Somers and then at a later time, his family. He was clearly displaying signs of considerable stress and was seeking help from the police. After his disappearance his family were desperately worried about him. The way some of their calls were handled left them feeling distraught at a time when they needed reassurance. 

“We have shared our findings with Mr Somers’ family who have shown courage and dignity during the inquest hearing and I again send my condolences at this difficult time.”

An initial contact from Mr Somers to police on 21 July 2012 was dealt with well by officers attending his address, who engaged with him and identified concerns which were referred to the neighbourhood policing team who made several attempts to follow up. Upon further contact with Mr Somers when he attended Charles Cross Police Station on 24 July 2012, a log raising a concern for his welfare was commenced.  While a number of attempts were made by officers to visit him as a result of this log, no-one in a supervisory capacity at Devon & Cornwall Police reviewed the log created to consider upgrading it from a concern for welfare to a missing person enquiry until his family reported him as a missing person. A number of telephone calls Mr Somers made on 24 July, the day before he was last seen alive, were poorly handled with police staff not acting on Mr Somers’ vulnerability, and failing to assess the information given. Furthermore, a police staff member received a call from a member of the public raising a concern for Mr Somers’ welfare which was also handled poorly and missed an opportunity to locate Mr Somers at that stage. 

Miscommunication between police and the ambulance service meant that police did not attend the report that a man was seen taking tablets outside the flat in Paignton on 25 July, despite the call being correctly graded as an immediate response. The IPCC found that the subsequent missing person enquiry, instigated on 31 July 2012, was generally conducted well and decision-making by police officers was reasonable. However, earlier confusion over the police recording of Mr Somers’ name, who was also known as Chang or Valan Pitts, meant that his sister was wrongly informed by police twice after 31 July that her brother had been found.

As a result of Mr Somers death and while the IPCC investigation was ongoing, the Force reviewed and implemented significant changes to their call handling systems in relation to callers who present as vulnerable. Similar shortcomings in the communication centre at Devon and Cornwall have also been indentified in two other unrelated IPCC independent investigations, The IPCC and the family have visited the communication centre in Plymouth and been shown how changes as a result of Mr Somers death have been implemented.