The Staffordshire Saga

Never let the truth get in the way of a good story.

― Mark Twain


Staffordshire Police is one of less than a small handful of forces which remain determined to abuse the ‘review’ provision contained within The Police (Injury Benefit) Regulations 2006.

Chief Constable Morgan, fresh from his experiences with attempting to run a mass review programme of injury pensions in Avon and Somerset, has committed Staffordshire to a similar enterprise.

Mr Morgan’s story in Avon and Somerset, which he has repeated in Staffordshire, is that there is a duty to review the degree of disablement of all former officers who are in receipt of an injury on duty pension. In an open letter dated 21st December 2017 CC Morgan writes,

On 26 April 2017 Staffordshire (sic) Police began a pension review of retired Injured on Duty (IOD) officers in accordance with Reg. 37 (1) of the Police (Injury Benefit) Regulations 2006 which places a duty upon the Police Pension Authority (the Chief Constable) to review whether the degree of the pensioners’ disablement has altered.


There is a duty, which is subject to a discretionary process before being acted upon, which allows a Police Pension Authority (‘PPA’) to,

. . .  consider whether the degree of the pensioner’s disablement has altered . . .


A PPA must, for each individual, first determine whether it is appropriate to consider whether their degree of disablement has altered. It must first identify a suitable interval has passed since the time of the last final decision was made on degree of disablement. In some instances, there may never be a suitable interval.

Let’s  put this as simply as possible. Unless a PPA can show, with a record of its reasoning process, that there has passed a suitable interval then a PPA is not entitled to make any consideration on degree of disablement.

This aspect of the Regulations was settled way back in 2003, in the case of Crocker. The court opined,

I regard the review provision as the key.  There is no need to speculate.  As and when circumstances dictate, the pension is reviewed.  The doctors, the Medical Referee, and Selected Medical Practitioner can, and here did, indicate when they thought that that should happen.  Such a power is wholly inconsistent with a need to forecast the future and then to test the calculation of the forecast against the actual out turn on a number of occasions.  The means by review of correcting the pension when circumstances change obviates the need not just to speculate, but to speculate and review as well.


That determination is not hard to understand, but in plainer English, the court decided that doctors, medical referees (now PMAB’s) and SMPs should not speculate about when any alteration in an individual’s degree of disablement might occur. A PPA should not use those speculations as reason to conduct a ‘review’.

Moreover, the court decided that any ‘review’ should be a reaction to a perceived change in circumstances of an individual.

Staffordshire Police, and others, should note well the deliberate use of the singular pronoun in regulation 37, which identifies – ‘the pensioner’. Not, ‘all pensioner’s degrees of disablement’ or even, ‘pensioner’s degrees of disablement‘.

When the Regulations speak of the singular person they intend a singular consideration, not a mass consideration.

The PPA should therefore conduct a full review only after having considered that the degree of the pensioner’s disablement has altered.

We have to comment too, that a ‘consideration’ is a very different concept to a ‘review’. In fact, the word ‘review’ does not appear anywhere in the Regulations.

What Staffordshire Police mistakenly reads into the Regulations is a carte blanche duty to intrude into the lives of disabled former officers. They think that they can demand a range of sensitive medical and financial information to which they have no legal right. They think that they can task their HR or Occupational Health departments to collude with the doctor hired by the force to conduct medical assessments and examination with a view to influencing what should be an independent medical decision by the SMP.

Staffordshire Police set about their plans to conduct a mass review programme in the manner of a surgeon removing a leg to treat an ingrowing toenail.

The truth is, all Staffordshire Police are entitled to do is to make a polite enquiry of only those pensioners where there my be a strong indication of alteration. Their duty is discharged entirely once they get the answer that there has been no alteration.

We can for the moment leave aside well-founded suspicions that wherever a force has decided to hold mass reviews the decision to do so has been based entirely on an expectation of saving money.

Such expectations have proved to be illusory.

The facts are that over a ten year period, up to 2015, across the country, when most forces were conducting reviews, the vast majority resulted in a decision there had been no alteration in degree of disablement.

Even if Staffordshire Police’s intentions were entirely based on an altruistic desire to comply with the basic concept that a police pension authority needs to ensure the correct level of pension continues to be paid, should circumstances alter, then conducting a mass review is not the way to go about it.

So, what has happened so far? What progress has been made since Mr Morgan’s announcement in April 2017?

A recent Freedom of Information request has revealed some interesting facts.

A company called IMASS/Medigold was contracted to provide a doctor or doctors to conduct the medical aspects of the reviews. This company’s doctor commenced his work with Staffordshire in February 2018.

A doctor assessed 26 injury on duty pensioners. He made a decision there had been no alteration in degree of disablement in 6 cases. In the remaining 20 cases he decided he could not make any decision. No former officers were decided to have experienced any alteration in degree of disablement.

There is no option in the Regulations for a SMP to discharge his task by not deciding. Once a PPA has commenced a consideration it must ensure a decision is made. Staffordshire PPA is in breach of its duty in respect of those 20 pensioners who have no finality.

Surely, common sense should prevail in these circumstances. A PPA has only one realistic option, which is to record the SMP’s ‘no decision’ as a decision there has been no alteration. It is inhuman to leave pensioners up in the air with the uncertainty a failure to decide engenders.

Other evidence of what has resulted from reviews is contained in a Progress Report dated 22nd March 2018.


It states a total of 45 injury on duty pensioners had been reviewed, or were in the process of being reviewed. Of them, 13 were decided to have no alteration in degree of disablement. In 4 cases, the pension was reduced due to a decision there had been a substantial improvement in degree of disablement. Of the remaining 28 pensioners there was no news.

Each review will have cost at least £500 to £600 and if there are appeals and court cases resulting from unlawful application of the regulations the experience of Avon and Somerset will be repeated in Staffordshire. When Mr Morgan was DCC in Avon and Somerset he saw a bill which ran into hundreds of thousands of pounds.

IODPA finds it hard to understand why Staffordshire police pension authority is happy to waste so much public money in conducting ‘reviews’ as currently constructed, when it is open to it to devise a process which will allow it to comply with regulation 37 at minimal cost, and without visiting anxiety and real harm on vulnerable disabled former officers.

Staffordshire Police tell a good story, but just like those of Mark Twain, it is complete fiction. And not even slightly amusing.

The Staffordshire Saga
Tagged on:     

36 thoughts on “The Staffordshire Saga

  • 2018-11-01 at 8:16 am

    I wonder how much public money has been spent on the PPAs personal quest? When will the PCC intervene?

  • 2018-10-18 at 11:47 pm

    Morgan (I can’t & won’t use rank or the title Mr regarding him, he’s earnt neither looking at his past exploits and mistaken beliefs ) thinks this is about saving a few quid, putting his own profile, self promotion and ego before looking after the most vunerable people who are associated with Staffordshire Police, his former pensioned off on duty injury officers, when it boils down to basics..what a man…

  • 2018-10-16 at 6:24 pm

    Given the recent publication of the Dame Laura report re bullying in Parliament , will anyone be looking into the actions of Staffordshire Police, their current Chief Constable and his cohort?One feels the sooner this is done and the truth comes out, the sooner those employed by said Force will be able to ‘stand down’ and get on with their ‘proper’ job of protecting ‘life and property’!

  • 2018-10-12 at 9:52 am

    They just don’t get it, do they?

    Or perhaps they do, but they just don’t care and think they are untouchable and above the law.

    The Regulations anticipate that a disabled former officer’s degree of disablement may alter over time. It may worsen or it may lessen. A police pension authority is entitled to consider, at such intervals as may be suitable, whether there has been any alteration.

    That entitlement does not extend to permitting a police pension authority to go on a fishing expedition to discover whether there has been an alteration in degree of disablement in any individual. It does not permit a police pension authority to conduct a mass fishing expedition to discover whether any of its disabled former officers have experienced an alteration in their degree of disablement.

    When an officer’s services are dispensed with due to injury on duty, the Regulations require that an injury pension is paid. A decision is made at that time as to the degree of disablement – and, most importantly, the Regulations say that the decision on whether the disablement is likely to be permanent must be made with an assumption that the individual will receive normal appropriate medical treatment for the disablement.

    Several stated cases have confirmed that any decision on degree of disablement is a final decision. Only if a police pension authority has good reason to believe there has been a substantial alteration in degree of disablement can it task a suitably qualified medical practitioner to determine if there has been alteration and if so the extent of any alteration.

    Yet here we see Staffordshire turning all this good law on its head and claiming it can conduct a mass intrusion into the lives of disabled folk – some of whom who will be vulnerable and in a very poor state of health – just to see if they can save some money.

    It displays a shocking disregard for the welfare of former officers who all were injured in the line of duty through no fault of their own. It is a shameful attempt to subvert the rule of law.

    Above all, this attack on injury pensions reveals a police force with senior management which is either nasty or ignorant, or a combination of both.

  • 2018-10-11 at 5:22 pm

    A huge thankyou to IODPA for this article. It clearly covers CC Morgan’s current and previous activities attempting to reduce IOD pensions to save money and, added to the other Forces who are currently using similar methods, It seems that the term ‘Mass reviews’ is becoming a regular thing and is virtually destroying any respect previous officers have in those forces now. There seems to be a conspiracy going on between CC’s, HR’s, SMP’s and each Forces legal departments (and newly established ‘gatherings’).

    I am shocked that those involved, especially the CC’s and legal teams seem to be unaware of the offences they are committing when following what can only be classed as unlawful activity in pursuing these activities:

    MALADMINISTRATION: inefficient or dishonest administration; mismanagement.
    synonyms: mismanagement, mishandling, misgovernment, misrule, incompetence, inefficiency, bungling, blundering;
    Maladministration is the actions of a government body which can be seen as causing an injustice. The law in the United Kingdom says Ombudsmen must investigate maladministration. The definition of maladministration is wide and can include: Delay.
    Or even worse…

    wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain
    synonyms: fraudulence, sharp practice, cheating, swindling, trickery, artifice, deceit, deception, double-dealing, duplicity, treachery
    Fraud is a criminal activity committed by those acting in a deceitful way.
    There are a number of offences within fraud which fall under three category types:
    1. False Representation – This is using dishonesty or false representation to make a gain for them or a loss for another.
    2. Failure to Disclose – Failing to disclose information when you have a requirement to do so in order to make a gain for them or a loss for another.
    3. Abuse of a Position of Trust – Acting against, or failing to act in the interest of another person they are expected to safeguard.
    Fraud can take the form of an abuse of position, or false representation, or prejudicing someone’s rights for personal gain.

    Just a thought!

  • 2018-10-11 at 5:19 pm

    The likes of those “senior” officers commented on in the blog are clearly ungrateful and disrespectful to those they command; and are seemingly ignorant to the sacrifices made by those they command. Perhaps those “senior” officers lack a significant and cultural indoctrination that moulds them into being good leaders and supervisors, because they attend Bramshill and similar “colleges” they should remember that no form of education cannot impact upon those that cannot or do not want to learn and there is no way you can absorb “smartness”. So please do not try to pull the wool over whom you believe are cannon fodder that you seem to believe you can dictate to!

  • 2018-10-11 at 3:52 pm

    Why are only less than a handful of Forces actively going after Injured on Duty Pensioners? Is this a cost saving excercise?

    Surely by now some bright spark has realised the cost of Staffs reviewing their injured officers, the negative press from failing to abide by the regulations at ET’s and JR’s does not outweigh any potential savings.

    Guess they might be shocked to find doing the reviews that many injuries do become worse as the condition and age of the initial injury deteriorates but I haven’t heard of anyone at all having their banding increased as a result of a review. Staffs and Northumbria and any other Forces should hang their heads in shame. After all it is the police pensioners who gave up, one day, any chance of normality and are all now classed as disabled………..

  • 2018-10-11 at 2:41 pm

    To all HR and Occupational Health staff in all 43 police forces in England and Wales:

    Please be aware that your bosses are not demi-gods whose every instruction you have to follow. Your bosses are almost certainly dangerously ignorant of the law which governs police injury pensions.

    You have a responsibility to absolutely ensure that any actions you take in regard to the administration of police injury pensions are lawful. You need also to ensure that you safeguard the rights of former officers, which include a right have reasonable adjustments made which take into account their disability.

    It has never been a valid excuse to say you were only following orders.

  • 2018-10-11 at 12:56 pm

    Don’t we remember being told in training that, if we ran towards danger, when everyone else was running away, and the worst should happen, we and our loved ones would be looked after? Perhaps it’s something that they’re no longer told (cynicaly one wonders why!) and perhaps Mr Morgan was away that day; perhaps ignorance of the facts is bliss, but it’s not a defence. Unless you have walked in the shoes of those who have been so seriously injured, or as a close family member you witness their suffering on a daily basis, you cannot know the impact, you cannot even begin to imagine it.

    Historian, Lord Acton’s 1887 statement that “All power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely” is alive and well in 2018.
    Mr Morgan has obviously had a charmed period of ‘service’ and I use that word questionningly. Has he never faced danger? Has he never had a colleague who has been seriously injured? Has he no empathy? Has he no moral integrity? I would appear not. Fortunately what the IOD’s have is a strength in numbers, excellent support and the moral high ground.

    I recently came across a very apt statement by Author, Katherine MacKenett.
    “Now, every time I witness a strong person, I want to know: what dark did you conquer in your story?
    Mountains do not rise without earthquakes.”

    The actions of Mr Morgan and his allies is ensuring that the strong IOD’s stand up for the weak. At present they are all facing earthquakes, but from them there are mountain ranges emerging and they will be so strong that no man will walk over them.

  • 2018-10-11 at 10:21 am

    Well well well, what a difference a couple of days make. Now we are hearing about an Assistant Commissioner who refused to help a dying colleague, preferring instead, to keep himself safe rather than face the prospect of getting injured.
    Doesn’t this epitomise with what is wrong in all this?
    Troops willing to protect the public and each other, knowing the risk is to be injured or death. But doing it anyway, that’s what they joined for.
    And then you have someone from the SMT, looking after himself. Fearful of being injured. Instead, self preservation kicked in and he then witnessed a murder of one of his knowing he could have made a difference.

    I’m sorry, but this tells me all I need to know about how bosses are and the contempt in how they treat the officer on the beat.

    Mackey, Morgan and all your sycophants, you truly make me sick.

    • 2018-10-11 at 5:50 pm

      Absolutely CORRECT! In contrast as we see today P.C. Leon McLEOD of BTP receiving the queens honours as whilst off duty was stabbed, fighting off terrorists on London Bridge, WITHOUT any weapons, communications or body armour unlike commissioner coward!

  • 2018-10-11 at 5:39 am

    This Chief Constable is embroiling his new force in the same mess that his last got into when most other forces are taking a far mor prudent view. He consistently and deliberately misinterprets regulations to justify his actions. Why? He is distressing and attacking his IOD pensioners when it must be clear to him that nothing positive will be gained from his actions and that the process is likely to cost his force a great deal more than it can possibly save. At what point will the authorities to which he is answerable hold him to account for this maladministration?

  • 2018-10-11 at 4:28 am

    Like a school bully Mr Morgan and his cronies try to pick on easy targets to balance his books
    Turns out these easy targets are not so easy to bully after all.
    They are brave former police officers who stepped in where others feared to tread and in so doing, many received permanent debilitating injuries.
    The thing is that injury does not now make these brave souls the easy targets that Mr Morgan and his cronies thought they were.
    They are well trained and able to gather the resources necessary to fight for fairness and proper application of the Police Injury Regulations.
    Empty threats, bluster, unenforceable demands and attempts to direct Selected Medical Practitioners in a particular course of action when they are required to be independent are all known of.
    Mr Morgan tried this course of action when he was DCC of Avon and Somerset Constabulary and look how that turned out and now you try the same course of action in Staffordshire.
    Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results ??

    Make us proud of our old force once more Mr Morgan, start abiding by the regulations that is all we ask for.

  • 2018-10-10 at 10:29 pm

    Message to Morgan, Wirtz, Coley, Baker, Kirby, Cheng and anyone else who thinks they can continue with their unlawful actions against disabled former officers, STOP NOW, the game is almost up!
    You may think you have power in your protected environment, but you are nothing to us. We know who you are and we know what you have been trying to do.
    But sorry to disappoint you all, nobody is above the law and the day of reckoning is fast approaching for all of you. Investigations are already under way, I’m sure you’re aware, and with more to come it’s now your turn to face uncertainty and fear, but in your case it is all self inflicted.
    In football parlance the game is all but over save for added time. By my watch you don’t have long left to play and you’re losing. It looks like relegation for you lot, you should have played fair, too many fouls and now you pay the price. The disabled team against you put up a good fight, fair but firm. The public were supporting them as they love an underdog, particularly those who became disabled because they put others first. Yes, nobody likes you and we don’t care.
    Let me finish my message to you with this suggestion, either stop the dirty tactics or give the game up. The season is nearing its end and now it’s not looking too good for your team. Maybe you should ask to be subbed, that way you may just avoid some of the blame before it’s too late! Or you could always feign injury, just like you think those have who are playing against you. Anyone know a good doctor?!

  • 2018-10-10 at 9:44 pm

    Pretty much everything written in the comments are echoed by every IOD that I speak with. I loved my life in the police and have close family both retired and currently serving. I still find it hard to take in what is going on having been so proud and privileged to serve. I was careful to put ‘life in the Police’ not job or career because that’s what it was to me. I was devastated to have this vocation cut short, but I’m now even more devastated at the continuing stress that all IODS are now under, it is nothing less than a drip feed of torture with no foreseeable end. All that is wanted by all in this boat is to be respected and treated fairly within the regulations. The consistent devious tactics, lies and distortions constructed to discredit IODS is really upsetting and draining. It is something that can not be fully understood unless you are going through or have been through something similar. It consumes every day life which is on permanent hold ‘just incase’ !! Not forgetting the effect on spouses and close family….All in the name of saving cash….thoroughly disgusted….and to the ‘Rhino skin’ perpetrators, ‘if this is what floats your boat I can only wish you well as it is not in my dna to be such a complete and utter tw@t’ but be careful as Karma has a funny way of turning around and biting you on the arse’….!!!!

  • 2018-10-10 at 9:17 pm

    When will Mr Morgan learn, we are not against being reviewed but are against the underhand, illegal, bullying tactics and total disregard of the regulations which are in place for a reason…
    Thank God for IODPA and it’s members without whom the iod’s would be well and truly in the mire….How much longer are Morgan, his Hench men and SMP’s going to keep up this cost cutting exercise, which has already cost him thousands, I wonder what the gmc think of their members acting in such a disgraceful manner !!??

  • 2018-10-10 at 6:58 pm

    The bizarre truth about this situation is that if the likes of Morgan and the rest carried out reviews to the letter of the regulations and current case law then there would be no need for IODPA. So a great big thanks goes to Staffordshire, Avon and Somerset, Northumbria, Essex and any other force for bringing together a fantastic group that have gone from strength to strength and continue to fight for injured officers.
    Isn’t it easy to follow the letter of the law and therefore not create additional work and serious problems for the staff who are attempting to administrate the reviews, it is a pity that the HR staff don’t read these bloggs as they may very well refuse or try to avoid getting involved.

  • 2018-10-10 at 12:39 pm

    The desk dwellers safely ensconced in their offices should look elsewhere at means of saving money. Leave the officers injured in the line of duty alone. Or, at the very least, consider how your actions impact upon them and treat them with the respect they deserve. None of them wanted to be in the position they find themselves in but they did it looking after the public. Bravely and selflessly.
    I can’t help but think those involved in pursuing these mass illegal ‘reviews’ have an agenda for their own advancement, and that is shallow, despicable behaviour from people in power who have lost their integrity and humanity on their way up the ladder.

  • 2018-10-10 at 11:01 am

    If the likes of Morgan and his little band of henchmen were doing this in the private sector, at least two things would happen.
    First an in depth costs assesment on the gains made against the overall cost of acceiving them. Once this is shown to be a massive loss leader, they would have been ordered to desist. If they continued, knowingly throwing money away, then the losses would be recovered from them for their deliberate actions.
    If Morgan and his crew ( I was going to say mates but doubt if he has any!) thought they would be held financialy liable for their actions, the gutless lot of them would desist immediately and run for the hills!
    I would be interested in any action we could take against them personally as opposed to their office, ie Chief Constable. The attacks against us IOD’s are personal, I for one would like to reciprocate against them as individuals. As the old saying goes, “don’t get mad, get even!”

  • 2018-10-10 at 10:15 am

    I’m yet to hear of a force that pays any regard to its injured officers. Until the chief officers are held to account and made a public example of, their need to save money over looking after their staff, who in many cases have given more than anyone ever should in the line of duty will always be their goal. I’m sure if they were praised by the government or the Police authority for providing unequivocal support for their injured then their actions would be entirely different.
    I’m not a person to wish ill of anyone but until they experience the process as a victim they will not truly know the damage it causes.

  • 2018-10-10 at 9:30 am

    The likes of Morgan Et Al know no limits as to what they are prepared to sacrifice on the altar of money. They bend and twist the regulations to suit their purposes, they tell lies, break the law and bully people. It’s a shame they don’t apply the same principles to doing their primary job of preventing and detecting crime which is where they love to be seen as whiter than white.

    It’s all gone quiet at the moment, has the monster gone back to his cave to lick his wounds from the latest mauling. Undoubtedly he will emerge at some time with a fresh load of lies to throw at us. Thank God for IODPA and it’s lawyers, at least we have someone who understands the regulations.

  • 2018-10-09 at 8:03 pm

    This is a well written piece detailing a truly shocking state of affairs that sounds like the actions of some third world dictatorship not by officers sworn to uphold the law.
    A total lack of honesty, integrity and failure to follow the Regulations combined with conspiracy to make up their own rules and attempt to bully and intimidate in order to reduce their budget by any means.
    Staffordshire Police is an absolute disgrace. Morgan really is but a puppet and we all know who is really pulling his strings.

  • 2018-10-09 at 4:41 pm

    The actions of Staffordshire Police disgust me. I was once a proud officer. I then was seriously injured whilst on duty and for many years have endured awful health because of this assault on me. I was retired on an injury pension but continued to be proud of my association with Staffs.

    However that has now changed. The actions of the PPA and his cronies have made my health worse and now an old man who should be enjoying life lives everyday worrying what the next thing is that they are going to attack me with.

    I hope you are proud knowing that your unlawful actions are causing anxiety, health problems and who knows what is next to these men and women whose only “crime” was getting themselves injured upholding the law of the land. Pity you don’t do the same

  • 2018-10-09 at 12:24 pm

    The three forces that continue to harass vulnerable retired injured police officers should be ashamed. Their actions are beyond belief causing great stress on these vulnerable people who should having been granted a pension be allowed to finally retire and try to get better and not to be harassed by their former employer for the rest of their lives.
    Ask the question why the vast majority of forces do not harass their former employees ?

  • 2018-10-08 at 5:55 pm

    The really sad thing about all these shenanigans from Avon & Somerset, Northumbria and Staffordshire is that there is no longer any trust or faith in the system. The likes of Morgan, Wirz, Coley and the infamous Dr Cheng and others have created an atmosphere in which any IOD pensioner called for review now treats every official letter and any stage of the process with suspicion (quite rightly).
    Even worse, any pensioner on a Band 2 or 3 whose level of disablement has deteriorated will now think twice about applying for a review in the knowledge that the Force would very likely use every trick in the book to either avoid increasing the Banding or even try and reduce it.
    This is a disgraceful situation and the perpetrators have lost all credibility in their various roles in the maladministration of the Injury Pensions Regs.
    Shame on them all.

  • 2018-10-08 at 3:17 pm

    What a disgraceful way to treat these men and women that were forced in to retirement because they were injured on duty.
    C.C Morgan have you thought about what you are doing to these injured, former officers, do you care?

  • 2018-10-08 at 3:16 pm

    How can the hierarchy at Staffs Police(and others) still keep believing in the naivety that people will keep believing their lies and deceit. We know why they are doing the reviews…money,yet we have seen video proof that Morgan is willing to fleece anybody who works there to save money. IOD’s are the tip of the iceberg,they are easy pickings as far as he’s concerned,those who gave the ultimate sacrifice to the job they believed in,but now mean nothing to the Police management committees and are just a burden to them now……so what if they suffer,they don’t give a damn.

    But the tides will turn,Morgan ( and others from other forces) has no or little understanding of the legal regulations,he is trying to manipulate to suit what he wants,even to the extent of employing Doctors to fill in forms the way he wants. He feels above the law,but we have news for him……no you’re not,and your day in court can’t be too far away.

    Morgan wants to save money,well here are some suggestions,get rid of most of the corrupt HR and OH departments. Stop employing computer Experts at 70k + a year,maybe you could use a car off the bank rather than your own private(read as paid by tax payers) lease. But the big saving,stop the illegal reviews,save the tax payers hundreds of thousands of pounds by your manipulation,try being honest with yourself and realise you are not going to get your knighthood through bullying and intimidation of vulnerable persons.

    As Shakespeare said,you can fool some of the people some of the time,but not all the people all the the time,however,this debacle has gone on so long now,I think very few people now will be fooled,or then again even surprised by the bullying ,lies and intimidation of this man. Certainly no one from Avon and Somerset or Staffordshire are surprised by this horrible man.

  • 2018-10-08 at 2:46 pm

    It is high time that CC Morgan became aware of what the Police (Injury Benefit) Regulations 2006 actually MEAN. The only times a review should take place is if the IOD pensioners condition has worsened and that he/she needs/requests to be reviewed, or if there arises a situation that shows a particular IOD pensioner is suspected of being cured of his condition.

    There are two ways of looking at the ‘review system’ as it is being used these days!

    Firstly the negative aspect of:
    (a) shocking lengths of unlawful tactics being used to do mass reviews by certain forces, particularly the Avon & Somerset, Staffordshire and Northumbria forces, and the
    (b)new ‘probes’ that are being added and used to try to fish out anything which could get apportionment or other reductions in the amount of IOD pension being paid to each pensioner involved.

    Secondly, and positively, these mass review procedures have:
    (a) become a form of information and advice to advance the knowledge of the Police (Injury Benefit) Regulations 2006 to hopefully each and EVERY IOD pensioner.
    (b) notified IOD pensioners. of if and when they were being DEFRAUDED during their review.
    (c) shown each IOD pensioner how dishonest their force is/.has been in their case.
    (d) Caused the creation of a registered charity IODPA who give whatever help is necessary to IOD pensioners.

    Remember the days before laptops, cellphones and Google? There was no way of knowing what our rights were as far as our IOD pensions( or anything else) were concerned. None of us would ever have imagined what a Force could get up to whilst handling those IOD pensions! It’s still shocking to know what we now know for sure. Once we were awarded our IOD pension that was it. No information as to the fact that we had a right to appeal an SMP decision, or that we had a right to a review if our condition seriously deteriorated.

    Hopefully, one day, ALL IOD pensioners will be getting the correct amount of IOD pension and all this bullying, harassing, and heavy tactics will be long gone. It will be interesting to see how many IOD pensioners will actually REQUEST to be reviewed!

  • 2018-10-08 at 2:10 pm

    I too am an IOD under review from Northumbria, a force with the worst reputation in the UK for the treatment of their IOD’s. I too have no problem with forces carrying out reviews, but only when they are lawful and fair. Northumbria have breached the first principle of the Data Protection Act, which covers the processing of personal data which must be— (a)lawful, and (b)fair and transparent. Note the word “MUST BE”
    Not “if you feel like it, or perhaps, or whatever you interpret it to mean” No – MUST BE is there for a reason. If you ignore those words and substitute your own, well you will grind the whole system to a halt because you are acting UNLAWFULLY – Simples.

    Threats to use Regulation 33 as a puishment have been held by the ICO to breach the fairness, and therefore the unlawfulness of such a threat.
    What is so hard about following the Regulations? Nothing need be added to them to bend them to your own unlawful will.
    I have no respect for the likes of CC Morgan, nor any head of HR willing to break the regulations with lies and deceit.

    One of the most concerning things is for those serving officers who daily run the gauntlet by putting themselves in harms way, not having confidence in your force to look after you should the worst happen. Knowing the likes of Morgan, Staffs and Northumbria have your back – NOT!!!

    Stick to the law, stick to the Regulations, and you cant go far wrong.

    I thank IODPA, the trustees, the Federation, Narpo, and our legal teams who have got our backs, unlike these two forces who would happily stab you in the back.

  • 2018-10-08 at 1:52 pm

    I hope the message is getting spread far and wide, which I’m sure it is…but I don’t think it’s hitting the ‘top corridor’.
    Just when will this whole, vile situation stop…so many people are broken, as a result of this unlawful attempt, and that’s what it is…an attempt, because Mr Morgan, you are getting nowhere fast…IODPA are picking up the pieces of the people affected on a daily basis, giving words of encouragement, and offering support..
    People are helping each other, as they struggle to comprehend why they are being victimised in such a way.
    The threats from Staffordshire Police are disgusting, the intimidation, and the lies…
    I hope it comes to an end one day very soon, because I for one, have had enough and want to get in with my life .

  • 2018-10-08 at 12:37 pm

    Three things cannot be long hidden: the sun, the moon, and the truth.

    The problem that CC Morgan has is that he already knows the truth.
    He was the DCC in Avon & Somerset when they were carrying out their ill fated review process. This failed at great cost to the Constabulary and general public who had to foot the bill, but at an even greater cost to the health of the unfortunate Injured former officers who were subjected to this pernicious process. Eventually as we know they abandoned the reviews saying that unless there was Home Office guidance and/or a change to the Regulations then no further reviews would take place.
    So why is CC Morgan carrying out the same process that his old force and almost every other force are not. If it is his duty to carry out the process then surely their are over 40 other PPA’s who are failing in their duty and should be subject to disciplinary action.
    The truth is, as CC Morgan knows that it isn’t his duty per se to carry out the reviews and certainly not in the manner they are being conducted.
    His raison d-etre for being in Staffordshire with his fellow Home Office sponsored lackey Andrew Coley is to push through the reviews so that other forces could then follow suit. The only problem is that they never catered for IODPA, it’s Trustees and it’s excellent legal team.
    The Sun and Moon shine brightly in the sky. It won’t be long before the Truth is no longer hidden from view.

  • 2018-10-08 at 10:56 am

    Let us not forget that it is not just the Police involved in this, the medical doctors or SMPs as they are known, also have a lot to answer for. When these ‘professionals’ get together for a common purpose, we had all better watch out!
    When you are paid to make a decision based on the regulations and do not, when you breach your own codes of conduct and confidentiality, do not expect ex police officers, their families and friends to lie down and die!
    No one is immune from this process and one day, one day… the truth will come out and all of those involved will be held accountable!

  • 2018-10-08 at 10:21 am

    Thank you to the IODPA for their clear and concise examination of the regulations and laying them out in the plain English that is so often hidden and used against those of us who struggle with the legal loophole culture.

  • 2018-10-08 at 8:00 am

    It is disgusting how Staffordshire are treating their former officers. In the process you have changed peoples lives forever. I used to work tirelessly to uphold the law and to deal with law breaking as a former officer and to think that this force is now acting beyond the law is incredible. You are there to uphold the laws of this land not break them. Justice will win through in the end and I hope those ultimately responsible for all the stress anguish and anxiety you have caused will be brought to justice.

  • 2018-10-08 at 12:33 am

    I’m one of those previously loyal retired IOD’s affected by this travesty taking place in Staffordshire.

    It started with a letter from the Staffordshire Deputy Chief Constable which came ‘out of the blue’, telling us that the Agreement between them, the Police Federation & NARPO, which had been in force for 9 years, was suddenly illegal and of no value!

    That was quickly followed by an unbelievable document that not only contained a very invasive questionnaire, but also demanded full medical records from birth, plus contained the dual threats of the Fraud Act & withdrawal of pension, if you failed to respond.

    As I had always been very loyal to my previous force, this was a real hammer blow to me and my family. How could they treat me in this way? Any other Govt department writes politely and asks that you tell them if there is any change. They don’t send letters with menaces! That tends to be the realm of criminals!

    Initially, I was on my own and didn’t really understand the regulations, as I’d always trusted them to do the right thing, so I didn’t know what to do. Many in that situation, simply believed they had our best interests at heart and sent back the information requested. Those that did have since realised that was a big mistake!

    However, I was not convinced and delayed. It was a good job I did, as quickly it became apparent after having spoken to others in the same position, that the demands being made and the way in which they were being implemented was unlawful. This was not about our welfare, this was purely about saving money and that was confirmed when it was found out later, that only 2 out of 43 forces, were actually doing these so called ‘Reviews’.

    Since that point back in the Spring of 2017, individually and together with others, often with support from IODPA and other IOD’s from across the UK, many whom are now firm friends, a number of Staffs IOD’s have stood up to the bullying, the harassment and the intimidation of Staffordshire Police. It has badly affected our health, but we have done this not just for ourselves, but for others, who due to their injuries, needed our protection.

    From not knowing about IODPA, the membership of the charity has expanded considerably in Staffs and we will all be eternally grateful for the help and support the Trustees, members and the legal teams have given us in support of our fight against these injustices.

    Staffs IOD’s now fall into two groups; those who are in the ‘know’ & realise their former loyalty has been abused…..and unfortunately, those who are still blind to what is happening.

    The original letter from DCC Baker, stated it would take18-months to complete the process, yet here we are at that point with that plan in tatters. The reasons for that failure are clearly illustrated in the blog, but there’s more! Three (3) Selected, not Senior Medical Practitioners have come and gone, with currently the post being vacant. Tens of thousands of £’s of public money has been wasted, money that should have been spent on policing. The reputation of the force forever tarnished.

    We have a Police Chief, who having failed in Avon & Somerset, came to Staffs, thinking he would succeed here. He hasn’t and despite his rant last Christmas, after the 1st SMP ‘abandoned ship’, plus his other failed attempts, especially the ‘bullying’ meeting back in July, has failed to frighten us into submission!

    In fact, it’s his staff who now seem to be more frightened of us! The threat to them, becoming more real daily, of having to justify the intimidation, bullying and victimisation, means that, no one dares to sign a letter anymore. Certain, people now seem to be trying to spread the ‘blame’ and no doubt staff are actively trying to destroy any evidence that they were involved. Hitler and his final months in his bunker come to mind.

    Will this Chief try a final throw of the dice, his version of the ‘Battle of the Bulge”? If he knows his history, then he will also know the outcome of that fateful last gamble! Especially, as we have in the UK, a justice system not based on politics, like the USA and good legal teams on stand by.

    Will his political masters, who let’s face it, brought him in to do this here, hoping that he would be successful. A success that could be rolled out across the UK, now pull him and his cronie out?

    Hopefully, I will be here in 12 months to tell you, maybe in another blog the outcome, but will he?

  • 2018-10-07 at 11:09 pm

    It is a disgrace that CC Morgan is treating his injured officers in such a manner. Those very officers whom he regularly tweets about, ingenuously stating he supports them all so much. The fact is, Mr Morgan, you don’t. And I have lost all respect for you.
    You should be leading by example, not hanging your former officers out to dry. They served their public without fear nor favour. And this is how you repay them.
    I know a couple of people who are under review and you have singlehandedly destroyed their lives. They suffer from PTSD and you have not shown any compassion, respect or integrity throughout the process.
    I spent many years at a senior level and I have never seen such disgusting behaviour towards our own.
    I have no problem with forces reviewing. However it must fall in line with the law, those Regulations that were put in place to protect us should we ever face the worse.

Comments are closed.