PCD 1795 Application to settle a claim against the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

The DMPC agree an increase to the authority to settle the claim of XAB.  Settlement has been agreed on two of the three claims against the MPS, as set out in the part 2 report.   

The Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime has the discretion to authorise the settlement of legal proceedings where it would be conducive to the maintenance of an efficient and effective police force. 

The DMPC is asked to approve an increase to the previous authority received to settle the claim of XAB, identified in the exempt part of this report.  

PART I - NON-CONFIDENTIAL FACTS AND ADVICE TO THE DMPC 

Decision required – supporting report 

1. Introduction and background 

1. The Claimants bring claims for Assault, Misfeasance in Public Office, discrimination under the Equality Act, breaches of Articles 3, 8 and 14 of the Human Rights Act, along aggravated and exemplary damages. Their claims arise from an incident on 8 May 2019.  The Second Claimant was escorting four patients including the First and Third Claimants.  The First Claimant became distressed and ran away from the others. The First Claimant was reported missing to police.   

2. The First Claimant was subsequently found by a member of the public who called police who detained her using handcuffs, batons and CS spray when they did not respond to their commands.  The Second and Third Claimants attempted to intervene resulting in an altercation with police.  

3. The claims of the Second (ZA) and Third Claimant (CS) were compromised at ADR on 22 October 2024. 

2. Financial Comments 

1. The cost of any settlement, if agreed, would be met from the centrally held MPS third party claims provision budget.  

3. Legal Comments 

1. Pursuant to the MOPAC Scheme of Consent and Delegation 2016, MOPAC must authorise the settlement because it fulfils the criteria set out in section 4.10 of the Scheme including the financial level. 

2. The DMPC has the power to authorise any sum required in connection with the settlement for any claim made against the Commissioner under Section 88 of the Police Act 1996. 

3. There is an open and exempt report as some of the information relates to data protection, is commercially sensitive and is legal professional privileged. 

4. Equality Comments 

1. Claims have been presented under the Equality Act. At present there is no evidence of discrimination, but this has been raised as a specific allegation by the Claimant solicitors. 

5. Background/supporting papers 

1. Part two exempt reports