Decision Report 201801850

  • Case ref:
    201801850
  • Date:
    December 2018
  • Body:
    Scottish Prison Service
  • Sector:
    Scottish Government and Devolved Administration
  • Outcome:
    Upheld, recommendations
  • Subject:
    personal property

Summary

Mr C complained about the way the Scottish Prison Service (SPS) handled his claim for lost property compensation. Mr C said that several items sent from his cell to the laundry had not been returned.

We were not satisfied that the SPS had undertaken a thorough investigation when Mr C first reported his laundry as missing. Given that prisoners have no control over their property in laundry bags between submitting them and receiving them again, we considered that the prison should have a robust tracking process to show that the laundry bags have been delivered back to the relevant prisoner. We also found that the subsequent review of Mr C's claim was unreasonable. The SPS claimed that the items in question were handed out. However, the only evidence identifying items handed out was the property card, which was not fully completed as Mr C had not signed out the items (although this is required on the card). We also noted that the SPS had provided inconsistent explanations about what happened to Mr C's property. We considered that they failed to handle Mr  C's claim reasonably and upheld this complaint.

Recommendations

What we asked the organisation to do in this case:

  • Apologise to Mr C for failing to fully investigate Mr C's claim of lost laundry. The apology should meet the standards set out in the SPSO guidelines on apology available at www.spso.org.uk/leaflets-and-guidance.
  • Reconsider the claim for lost property, taking into account the points contained in our decision.

What we said should change to put things right in future:

  • The SPS should have a system in place to adequately track prisoner's laundry, so that any claim for missing laundry can be fully investigated.

We have asked the organisation to provide us with evidence that they have implemented the recommendations we have made on this case by the deadline we set.

Updated: December 19, 2018