Skip to content

NPCC Security Systems Policy (1496A/23)


Freedom of Information Request with Reference to The Application of the NPCC Security Systems Policy.

With reference to the above Policy, I ask the following questions regarding the training of your new communications centre staff namely those who receive calls and/or deploy a police resource to incidents. This includes the supervisors of such staff and the senior officer in charge of the comms centre:

1.     What is documented regarding the above staff being informed that your chief constable has banned the failed Type A systems that lose their Unique Reference Number (URN) from contacting your police communications centre on initial activation? These have therefore joined the Type B alarms in no longer having a URN, namely those that refuse to abide by the policy. This matter of education is relevant to the correct application of the Codes of Ethics of Fairness, Honesty, Integrity, Accountability. These are essential requirements to the application of the Code of Ethics and the National Decision Model.

2.    What is documented about the above staff being educated in the requirement of a Keyholder to firstly attend all premises without a URN as per your published policy, namely the premises with the Type B and Failed Type A activations are to be treated the same? (See sections 3.1.1. Level Three – Withdrawn, and 3.6.4.)

3.    If there is no documentation to 3) above, what documentation is there to explain to the alarm purchasing public that clearly states the Type B and Withdrawn Type A can be treated differently, namely the Type B alarms can always be considered for attendance but the failed Type A’s never can be, having been banned from contact by your chief constable?

4.    What is documented about the training given to new communications centre staff on the application of the Health and Safety at Work Act to all sensor anomaly incidents, Type A (with a URN), Type B (without a URN) and the failed Type A (that have had their URN ‘Withdrawn’ or ‘Deleted’) as per the Appendix G form?

5.    What is documented about any added training input which educates the above staff on the reason why your chief constable has added to the Appendix G the reason for the Civil Tort Legislation, namely The Occupiers Liability Act 1957, added as recent as April 2022?

Your chief constable states, ‘Police officers will not normally enter the premises without the keyholder. However, this may be necessary on occasions due to suspicious circumstances. To ensure the safety of officers, the force must be pre-warned of site risks, therefore you are required to state any site hazards in accordance with the Occupiers Liability Act 1957.’

6.    What is documented where your constabulary ever disagrees with any part of the policy and asked for a policy amendment?

7.    What documentation is there on any local procedure that your constabulary applies to drive forward the further applications for URNs by those businesses and dwellings that wish to protect their premises by a police attendance? This drive towards 100% of premises applying for URNs would increase the Health and Safety features of the policy by alarms of a minimum standard and requirements for premise staff to be trained in order to reduce false activations, with a maximum number of false applications, at which the police will act to ban further calls by removal of the URN and a ban on the call from the Alarm Receiving Centre. (These points are related to points 3 and 4 above.)


Please find attached our response (1496A_Attachment).