Skip to content

Car Crime U.K.

who knows, who cares?

Menu
  • Events Timeline
  • Stolen Vehicle Info’
    • ‘Form A Squad’ – Ineffective Action
      • The Vehicle Crime Task Force (VCT) – 2019
      • 2022 to 2023 National Vehicle Crime Working Group
    • Stolen Vehicle Recovery – Found in the U.K.
    • Stolen Vehicle Recovery – Found Abroad
    • OPERATION IGNEOUS – reducing reported car theft by 30%
  • Collision & Crime Reports
    • Police Theft Reports
    • Police Collision Reports
    • Police Disclosure Delays
  • Resources
    • Your Vehicle Theft Insurance Claim
    • Police Contacts
  • News
  • Interesting & Reference
    • Abbreviations & Terminology
  • Contact
Menu

NPCC ‘All Chief Constables Circulars’

On occasions, the National Police Chiefs Council (NPCC) sends ‘guidance’ to every UK constabulary. Examples of such messages can be read here:

  • S.170 RTC – exchange of name & address following an RTC
  • Weeding of PNC LoS markers

These circulars are not emailed but posted via the NPCC online platform – some form of intranet?

To whom they are sent may appear obvious – the Chief Constable. However, most have admin’ staff who handle day-to-day matters and could be expected to allocate the correspondence to the appropriate party.

Concerning the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) and the ‘weeding’ circular (above), when asked about their action upon receipt of the NPCC circular, the MPS could find no reference to it.

The constabulary suggested the NPCC be contacted to determine to whom it was dispatched at the MPS and an email approach was made to the NPCC:

  • “Could you also advise to whom, at the MPS your ‘all chief constables’ messages are sent to – ideally the name(s), email address(es)s & department(s)”

The NPCC considered such a request as falling to the Freedom of Information Act and subsequently responded ‘

  • ‘Whilst all members of the NPCC, to include Chief Officers of the Metropolitan Police Service, have access to the online platform, and can therefore view the letter, unless they download the letter onto their server, it would not be held by them. The NPCC does not hold a record of the MPS Chief Officer team having downloaded the letter onto their server.’
  • “The NPCC does not hold information captured by your request. All chief constable’ messages are not sent via email, therefore the NPCC do not hold the information you are seeking.“

The NPCC does not hold a list of the MPS names, emails and departments that are permitted access, and under FOI regulations there is no requirement to create information to answer a request.

The circulars are sent to ‘Chief Officers of the Metropolitan Police Service’, seemingly ‘the MPS Senior Management Team – who’s who | Metropolitan Police’.

  • However, the NPCC do not hold a record of who has viewed the letter, therefore this (the above) sentence is not confirming that any individuals from the MPS have viewed it.

Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

Surely the Met’ Police knew or could ascertain, to whom these circulars were sent, and who had access to them. Incredulous of the MPS response, a FoIA request was made of the constabulary for the information but they were unable (within the 18 hours the Act provides) to find an individual who is in receipt of the communication referred to. – read more here.

Guidance

‘Guidance’ appears to be interpreted differently by each constabulary; if it suits them they act upon the advice as though a directive, cast in stone. Conversely, it may be referred to as ‘only’ guidance i.e. there is no requirement to adhere to the cicular’s content.

Recent Posts:

  • Crime Reports – Copies of ‘Consent’
  • Thefts Down – Except for Newer Cars!
  • Increase Pre-Crush Retention Period to 28 days?
  • Reducing Vehicle Theft by up to 30%
  • ‘The Others’ … are you among them?
  • Vehicle Abandonments Raise Questions Over Theft Claims
  • The State of Vehicle Taking in the UK: A Crisis of Enforcement, Not Engineering
  • Keystone Krooks – but £1.4 million stolen!
  • 2024 Vehicle Theft – how well (or otherwise) did your constabulary perform?
  • Vehicle Crime. Is Police Language Bluring Facts?
  • Superficial Approach to Vehicle Taking Overlooked Organised Crime
  • Keyless Vehicle Taking – Really?
  • Accuracy & Consistency Required
  • Do we need new legislation?
  • A System Built on Blind Faith? The Flaws in Police Information Dissemination
  • Which? … What?
  • The Rise & Fall of Operation Igneous
  • Vehicle Taking – Quantity not Quality
  • Vehicle Theft: 30 years of Complacency
  • The Devalued Crime Report
  • Vehicle Theft Surge Demands Police Action on Crime Report Disclosures
  • FoIA – Staffordshire Police are not the worst offenders
  • Vehicle Repatriation
  • Crime Number Devaluation
  • Manufacturers Cause Vehicle Thefts …
  • PNC LoS Report Weeding
  • Staff-less-shire Police Report Disclosures
  • W. Mercia Police – RTC Report Disclosures
  • Delaying Finalisation of Insurance Claims (for some)
  • Policing (or not?) Vehicle Theft
  • Fraud Not Theft … face the facts!
  • Cloned Plates: Register of Keepers – Lacking Integrity?
  • Police Theft Report Disclosure
  • Headlamp Dazzle & Eye-Snatching
  • Scrap ‘six-week weeding’ of stolen vehicle VRMs
  • Police Vehicle Theft Reports – A Lack Of Understanding And Standardisation

Legal Disclaimer
The information provided on this website is for general informational purposes only and should not be considered legal advice. While we strive to ensure the accuracy and relevance of the content, laws and regulations change frequently, and the application of legal principles varies based on specific circumstances.

No Legal Advice
Nothing on this website constitutes legal, financial, or professional advice. You should not rely on the information provided here as a substitute for seeking qualified legal counsel. If you require legal advice or guidance, we strongly recommend consulting a licensed solicitor or legal professional.

No Liability
We make every effort to keep the information up to date and accurate, but we do not guarantee the completeness, correctness, or applicability of any content. We accept no responsibility or liability for any errors, omissions, or reliance placed on the information contained within this site.

External Links & Third-Party Content
Any external links or references provided are for convenience only and do not constitute endorsement. We are not responsible for the accuracy, legality, or content of any external sites or third-party materials linked from this website.

User Responsibility
It is the responsibility of all users to verify the accuracy and relevance of any information before relying upon it. If you have a legal issue, you should seek advice from a qualified professional relevant to your situation.

By using this website, you acknowledge and agree to this disclaimer. If you do not agree, you should discontinue use of the site immediately.

© 2025 Car Crime U.K. | Powered by Superbs Personal Blog theme