Staff Officer Sgt Clive Collings

Following receipt of a decision letter from DCC Holt, I had a question relating to the appeal body. The complaint had been dealt with via Local Investigation which by default means the appeal body is the IPCC. This had been communicated to me along with the original record of complaint and by the investigating officer but on DCC Holts decision letter, he had stated that the appeal body was infact South Yorkshire Police.

To avoid any confusion and risk of my appeal going astray, I emailed DCC Holt for confirmation and Sgt Collings stepped in to answer, below is the exchange of emails (mine are in red, Sgt Collings in blue .

I am in receipt of your letter dated 25th March 2014 in relation to CO/0xxxx/14.
Your final paragraph informs me that any appeal should be submitted to the Appeal Authority of South Yorkshire Police. Can you confirm this is correct ?

Although I cannot confess to know with any certainty personally, I would suggest that if Mr Holt has confirmed this to be the case, it will be so.

Whilst I appreciate you taking the time to respond, Complaint Appeals have strict rules attached to them so I need definitive confirmation.

The Deputy Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police has written to you and, within that letter, has detailed the appeal procedure. You can take it as read that this information is correct.

Whilst the letter may be from the DCC of South Yorkshire Police, he is like the rest of us human and liable to make mistakes.
I have asked you to confirm that the appeal body he has indicated in his letter is correct - what I need is confirmation, not your personal opinion as to whether DCC Holt made a mistake or not.

DCC Holt will email you shortly in relation to your enquiry over the weekend. I trust this will provide the answer to the question posed. 

This final email is from Maxine Agar, PA to DCC Holt.
Mr Holt is on annual leave this week, however, I have checked with Professional Standards Department and the last paragraph of Mr Holt's letter dated 25 March is in fact incorrect.  Please accept our sincere apologies for this error.

I had previously dealt with Sgt Collings on another matter earlier in the year and on that occasion he also gave personal opinion rather than going away to find the facts.