Victim Not Suspect

Force Checker

Force dossier

British Transport Police

Eight lenses on this force, live misconduct coverage, official statistics, inspection grades, complaints, resourcing, recorded crime, and how it sits nationally.

01/08Live misconduct coverage (third-party)

Misconduct coverage, live

Live coverage from a third-party source - see attribution below for source, scope and caveats.

At a glance

British Transport Police

High concern
13%

Dismissal rate · share of recorded cases ending in dismissal

12.5%

Between 6 July 2018 and 6 May 2026, British Transport Police recorded 24 misconduct cases. 3 resulted in dismissal. That is 12.5% of recorded cases. A low share of recorded misconduct cases result in dismissal, despite the volume reported.

Cases
24
Dismissals
3
Earliest
6 Jul 2018
Latest
6 May 2026
Show as a table (accessible alternative)
ForceBritish Transport Police
Misconduct cases24
Dismissed3
Dismissal rate12.5%
Period6 Jul 20186 May 2026
RatingHigh concern

02/08Official Home Office figures (2019/20)

Official government statistics, 2019/20

The most recent year for which the Home Office published a per-force breakdown of this specific transparency-ratio dataset. More recent Home Office data exists at the national level (see National Context below) but is not broken down by force. Shown separately from the live coverage above because it has a different source (gov.uk, official) and a different vintage.

Official Home Office figures · 2019/20

Government statistics, historical

Gov.uk · 2019/20

No matching record was found for British Transport Police in the 2019/20 Home Office dataset (this dataset covers the 43 territorial forces of England & Wales; specialist forces such as British Transport Police are not included).

03/08HMICFRS PEEL inspection grades

HMICFRS PEEL inspection grades

The inspectorate's own published assessment of the force as an organisation - effectiveness, efficiency and legitimacy, pillar by pillar, with any current causes of concern. A different lens again: PEEL is about organisational performance, not individual misconduct, complaint volumes, or crime rates. Placed alongside the official Home Office figures above because both are official regulatory findings about the force.

HMICFRS Commissioned Review · 2022-24

Inspectorate grades for British Transport Police

Report 2024-02-22

British Transport Police is inspected under a distinct ministerial commission rather than the standard 43-force PEEL framework, so the pillars below are not directly comparable to territorial-force grades.

Pillars rated below Adequate

1/7

Inadequate, Causing Concern, or Requires Improvement.

Pillar grades · sorted worst first

  • Vetting & corruption: Inadequate
  • Serious organised crime: Adequate
  • Strategic planning: Adequate
  • Public engagement: Good
  • Crime prevention: Good
  • Safeguarding: Good
  • Workforce: Good

No causes of concern recorded in this report.

Inspector notes

Verified directly against the official HMICFRS report text, 20 June 2026. BTP is a specialist national force policing the rail network across Great Britain, inspected under a distinct seven-area ministerial commission (2021) rather than the standard 43-force PEEL framework, not directly comparable to territorial force grades. No formal cause of concern issued under this commission, though vetting and counter-corruption, assessed separately under HMICFRS's national vetting programme, was rated Inadequate. One area for improvement set for May 2023 regarding independent advisory group governance. Published 22 February 2024.

Source: HMICFRS - official report ↗

04/08IOPC complaints (2024/25)

IOPC complaints - volume, timeliness, and how they came to be recorded

One panel covering everything the IOPC's 2024/25 annual report says about complaints against this force: the size-adjusted complaint rate, how quickly complaints are logged and complainants contacted, and the mix of reasons each case came to be formally recorded under Schedule 3.

IOPC complaint volume · 2024/25

Complaints logged per 1,000 employees

IOPC · 2024/25

Complaints per 1,000 employees · the IOPC's own size-adjusted rate

164vs national average of 373

British Transport is 56% below the national average for complaints logged per 1,000 employees in 2024/25. This rate controls for force size, so it can be compared directly between forces - raw volume cannot.

Allegations per 1,000 employees · Table 5, the finer-grained metric

221vs national average of 660

An allegation is a single specific accusation; a single complaint case can contain several. British Transport recorded 1,092 allegations across 811 complaint cases (≈1.3 allegations per case), 67% below the national average on the per-1,000 rate.

Genuinely distinct from the case-level rate above: that counts how many people complained; this counts the discrete accusations within those complaints.

Complaint cases logged
811
Workforce (FTE)
4,952
Share of national total
0.9%

Complaint-handling timeliness (Table 3, working days)

Days to log complaint
2vs 7 nat'l
Days to contact complainant
2vs 9 nat'l

National averages: 7 days to log, 9 days to contact. Most forces cluster within 1–10 days on both.

Reasons recorded under Schedule 3 (Table 4, % of 269 cases)

National: 24/40/20/16

Nature of allegation

Mandatory by type

51%

nat'l 24% · 27pp above

Body decides

Force's own choice

5%

nat'l 40% · 35pp below

Complainant wishes

Person asked formally

6%

nat'l 20% · 14pp below

After dissatisfaction

Only after push-back

39%

nat'l 16% · 23pp above

This describes process - how each case came to be formally recorded - not severity or outcome. None of these categories is automatically good or bad in isolation.

How allegations were finalised (Table 14, % of finalised allegations)

National: 44/45/11

Outside Schedule 3

Informal / other means

56%

nat'l 44% · 12pp above

Sched 3, not investigated

Recorded but not investigated

39%

nat'l 45% · 6pp below

Sched 3, investigated

Recorded and investigated

5%

nat'l 11% · 6pp below

This is a procedural breakdown - how the force resolved its allegations - not a severity or outcome judgement. A high "investigated" share is not automatically better, and a high "outside Schedule 3" share is not automatically worse; both can be appropriate depending on the complaint mix. Distinct from Table 4 above: that asks why a case was formally recorded; this asks how the resulting allegations were ultimately resolved.

What happens when someone challenges the outcome

IOPC reviews · Tables 26 & 27

Independent IOPC review applications and outcomes

When a complainant disagrees with how the force handled their case, they can ask the IOPC to review it independently. The IOPC either runs a paper review or escalates to a full investigation. In either path, the review can find the force's original decision was not reasonable and proportionate - i.e. overturned. Nationally, 29.8% of valid completed reviews are overturned - nearly 1 in 3.

Overall overturn rate · this force

Too few cases for a meaningful rate

Only 4 validly completed reviews in 2024/25, of which 1 were overturned. Below the 10-case threshold we use before quoting a percentage, because one or two cases would swing the number wildly.

Reviews NOT escalated (paper review)

0 overturned of 0 valid · no completed reviews

Reviews escalated to investigation

1 overturned of 4 valid · too few for a meaningful rate

Counts: 3 review applications received in 2024/25 · 100% escalated to a full investigation.

This is the IOPC's own independent judgement on the quality of this force's complaint-handling decisions - distinct from volume, rate, timeliness, recording reason, or finalisation method. A percentage is shown only when the underlying sample is at least 10 valid completed reviews; below that, we show raw counts and flag the sample as too small.

Source: IOPC, Police complaints statistics for England and Wales 2024/25, Tables 26 & 27 · Financial year 2024/25.

What this is and isn't. This counts complaints logged - not their severity, outcome, or whether they were upheld. A high rate can reflect under-confidence in informal resolution or proactive logging as much as worse behaviour; a low rate can reflect genuinely low complaint volume or under-recording. Treat as one signal, not a verdict.

The IOPC also publishes per-force quarterly bulletins with a "most similar force" comparison. The headline volume, rate and timeliness figures shown here come from the annual report; the fuller per-force bulletins live at the source link below.

Source: IOPC, Police complaints statistics for England and Wales 2024/25 · Financial year 2024/25. Workforce denominator: Home Office Police Workforce, 31 March 2024.

05/08Resourcing context (workforce + funding)

Resourcing context

Two paired panels that together answer the resourcing question: who staffs the force (Home Office workforce data, 2025) and what it is funded with (2026/27 Police Grant Report). Use these to check whether a force's claim to be under-resourced is supported by the numbers. Neither figure is presented as a cause of misconduct or complaint volume elsewhere on the page - they are contextual facts a reader can weigh.

Workforce · Home Office 2025 open data

Who works at British Transport Police

Total officers (headcount)

2,884

Profile vs national average (tick = national)

Aged 25 or under

5.7%

164 of 2,884 · national avg 12.8%

Over 55

9%

260 of 2,884 · national avg 2.2%

Length-of-service breakdown not published for this force.

Sickness absence (FTE)

0.74%

20.98 FTE days lost vs 2851.65 total FTE · national avg 2.3%

Ethnic minority officers

11.8%

339 of 2,884 · national avg 5%

Four contextual layers about the force's workforce: age profile, sickness absence, length of service, and ethnic minority representation. None of these are causal explanations for misconduct or complaint figures on this page - they are facts you can weigh yourself, particularly if a force cites resourcing or inexperience to explain poor performance.

Notable in context

British Transport Police has by far the oldest age profile - 9.0% of officers are over 55, against a national average near 2%. Stated as fact.

A workforce fact, not an explanation for misconduct, complaint volume, or any other figure shown elsewhere on this page.

Source: Home Office, Police Workforce, England and Wales (open data tables) · 2025 publication.

Funding figures aren't published for British Transport Police in the 2026/27 Police Grant Report.

06/08Recorded crime context (ONS/Home Office, Y/E Dec 2025)

Recorded crime context

Different in kind from every other section: this measures what was reported TO the police, not what the police DID. Crime rate is not a performance measure - it can reflect community, demographic and reporting factors as much as anything about the force. The stalking & harassment line is the most directly on-topic comparator for this site's mission.

Recorded-crime figures aren't published for British Transport Police in the dataset we currently track.

07/08Stalking Super-Complaint response

Stalking Super-Complaint response

What this specific force has published in answer to the 2022 to 2024 Suzy Lamplugh Trust super-complaint on the police response to stalking. A different question, a different evidence base, the same British Transport Police.

Sources: each force's own published page or action-plan document, linked directly on the card below.

What British Transport Police has published

BTP publishes a narrative 'Stalking Action Plan Update' on its policies page, with the full plan attached as a PDF. Quotes below are verbatim from the on-page update.

  • Over the past year, we have implemented significant improvements, including enhanced training for officers, the establishment of a dedicated stalking scrutiny panel, and the introduction of a clear referral pathway for victims.

    Verbatim from source

  • Working closely with Paladin in England and Wales and Action Against Stalking in Scotland, victims are now supported by accredited Independent Stalking Advocacy Caseworkers (ISACs), ensuring a trauma-informed, victim-centred approach to investigations.

    Verbatim from source

  • All stalking offenders are referred into MAPPA, enabling robust multi-agency risk assessments and management plans. We also actively consider Stalking Protection Orders in every case to prevent re-offending and safeguard victims.

    Verbatim from source

  • Looking ahead, we will continue to refine our processes, learn from partners, and apply best practice models such as Operation Soteria to address stalking linked to domestic abuse and sexual offences.

    Verbatim from source

CaveatThe detailed plan is the attached PDF (dated 19 November 2025), which we couldn't fetch from this sandbox to transcribe.

Published on BTP's policy and procedures page, with a Stalking Action Plan PDF dated 19 November 2025.

Read the source ↗

For context: live data

These figures come from misconduct999.com, the third-party blog that publishes posts on police misconduct hearings, scraped and aggregated by our backend. It does not measure the stalking response directly, that data is not publicly available per force, so treat the two panels as a starting point for further questions, not a verdict.

Cases
24
Dismissed
3
Dismissal rate
12.5%
Window
Jul 2018 to May 2026

We deliberately do not score a "matches" or "does not match" verdict between the two panels. Stalking-response performance per force is not in the public data; misconduct outcomes are a different signal. Both are real datasets. Whether they're statistically linked is what the correlation analysis in the National Context section actually tests, see the result rather than assuming one.

08/08National context and ranking

National context and ranking

How this force sits against the other 43. The national picture is taken verbatim from the NPCC's own synthesis report on Recommendation 29. The compare chart uses the same live misconduct coverage as Section 1 (third-party blog aggregation, not official record).

National picture · all 43 forces

What the NPCC's own synthesis report actually says

The NPCC commissioned an executive summary collating every force's November 2024 action plan and March 2025 six-month update against the 15 recommendations made to chief constables. The extracts below are verbatim from that report. Nothing on this page is paraphrased without being labelled. Useful context even for the forces that don't yet have an individual card here.

Progress the report records

  • Recommendation 10, training

    88,879 officers had completed the College of Policing stalking e-learning by January 2025, an 800% rise since 2023, but still well short of the relevant workforce.

    Data gathered from the College of Policing confirms that, as of January 2025, the completion rate across all forces in England and Wales stands at 88,879. This is compared with 148,886 officers across England and Wales, not all of whom will require this training. Whilst this is a considerable improvement, marking an 800% increase since 2023, there remains more work to be done to ensure all frontline staff have completed these e-learning packages.

    Verbatim from Recommendation 29 report

  • Recommendations 27 & 28, publication

    All 43 forces have published an action plan and submitted a six-month progress update.

    All forces across England and Wales have complied with this recommendation and action plans have been published on force websites. Updated action plans have been received by the NPCC from all forces detailing progress made against commitments detailed in their initial action plans.

    Verbatim from Recommendation 29 report

Gaps the report itself flags

  • Recommendation 14, victim needs assessments

    Some forces' action plans did not even mention Victim Needs Assessments. They have been told to fix that.

    Certain forces did not reference completing a 'Victim Needs Assessment' specifically in their action plans; these forces have been asked to update their action plans accordingly, and to ensure that this is covered in any future updates or publications.

    Verbatim from Recommendation 29 report

  • Recommendation 12, risk assessment

    There is no nationally accredited stalking risk-assessment tool. Forces are picking from a patchwork.

    There is currently no single risk assessment which has been accredited and endorsed for use in the UK for all stalking types.

    Verbatim from Recommendation 29 report

  • Recommendation 13, Stalking Protection Orders

    The NPCC's own report records ongoing judicial reticence to grant SPOs, including refusals where police bail is in place.

    Throughout the updates and communications with forces, the NPCC is aware that there are ongoing barriers with the application for SPOs, particularly with reticence from the judiciary. There have been examples when police bail has been used as a reason to refuse applications for SPOs.

    Verbatim from Recommendation 29 report

  • Recommendation 18, investigations

    Some forces admit they are not using arrest powers in stalking cases at the rate that would be expected.

    Certain forces have acknowledged that they are not using arrest powers in stalking cases at a rate that is expected. This is demonstrated in their data reviews and they have made firm commitments to address this.

    Verbatim from Recommendation 29 report

  • Cross-cutting, non-DA stalking

    Non-domestic-abuse stalking victims are repeatedly identified as the gap in provision.

    There continues to be a disparity between service provisions available to Domestic Abuse and Non-Domestic Abuse victims/perpetrators. Forces have widely acknowledged that the availability of services for non-DA stalking cases needs to be reviewed and increased, however it has been highlighted by some areas that their demand for such services comes primarily from DA cases.

    Verbatim from Recommendation 29 report

Structural context

  • Recommendation 16, victim support funding

    British Transport Police flags a structural gap: no PCC, no joint-service funding.

    British Transport Police have noted that they do not have a PCC or equivalent and therefore do not receive any funding for joint services. Despite this, they have engaged with Paladin to maintain some form of provision for victims and are working with local areas to ensure services are provided where needed.

    Verbatim from Recommendation 29 report

SourceThe Police Response to the Stalking Super-Complaint, Recommendation 29: Report on the progress made by Police Forces · NPCC (published via gov.uk assets).

Executive summary collating all 43 forces' November 2024 action plans and March 2025 six-month progress updates against the 15 recommendations made to chief constables.

Read the full report (PDF) ↗Checked 21 June 2026.

Stalking & harassment recorded rate · national context · Y/E Dec 2025

West Yorkshire has by far the highest recorded stalking & harassment rate in England and Wales

West Yorkshire sits at 19.5 per 1,000 - meaningfully above every other force and roughly 2.0× the national average of ~9.8 per 1,000. Important caveat: a higher recorded rate can reflect more victims coming forward and better recording practice as readily as more actual offending. We state the figure; we do not imply cause.

Highest recorded rate

  • West Yorkshire19.5
  • Humberside14.9
  • Avon and Somerset14.6
  • Greater Manchester14.5
  • Cleveland13.9

Lowest recorded rate

  • Suffolk4.7
  • North Yorkshire5.1
  • Wiltshire5.7
  • Norfolk6.0
  • Sussex6.5

City of London is suppressed by ONS in this dataset (tiny resident population) and is excluded from these rankings.

Source: ONS / Home Office Police Recorded Crime, Table P3 (year ending December 2025).

Cross-reference · recorded-crime vs misconduct coverage

Do high-crime forces also show up high on misconduct coverage?

Worth knowing whether the recorded-crime picture and the accountability picture line up or look independent. We compute the correlation honestly across the 42 forces present in both datasets. State the finding; no causal claim either way.

  • Stalking rate vs live misconduct count

    r = -0.09

    Essentially no linear relationship

  • Total crime rate vs live misconduct count

    r = 0.31

    Moderate relationship

  • Stalking rate vs dismissal rate

    r = -0.08

    Essentially no linear relationship

The two pictures are largely independent - a force's recorded stalking & harassment rate doesn't reliably predict its misconduct-coverage volume, and vice versa. The crime rate panel measures what was reported to the police; the RAG rating and misconduct coverage measure what the police did. The cross-tab below shows how stalking-rate tiers map onto RAG ratings - read it as descriptive, not causal.

Low third

Acting
5
Concern
5
Serious
1
Insuff.
3

Middle third

Acting
7
Concern
4
Serious
2
Insuff.
1

High third

Acting
6
Concern
4
Serious
1
Insuff.
3

Funding per head · national context · 2026/27

Where forces sit on funding per head of population

National average: £297 per head. Total funding rises from £17,565.4m to £18,361.5m (+4.5%). The Metropolitan Police receives £439 per head - nearly double the lowest-funded territorial forces. Welsh forces and Merseyside cluster notably high per-head; a real geographic funding pattern, stated as fact without speculation on cause.

Highest per head

  • Metropolitan£439
  • Merseyside£342
  • Gwent£341
  • North Wales£338
  • South Wales£337

Lowest per head

  • Lincolnshire£232
  • Bedfordshire£234
  • Wiltshire£235
  • Essex£236
  • Cambridgeshire£237

City of London is excluded from per-head rankings - its small resident population vs large daytime/workday population means a per-head figure would be misleading and is not published.

Source: Police Grant Report (England and Wales), 2026/27.

Compare all forces

44 forces, ranked by dismissal rate

Of 44 forces: 18 acting, 13 concern, 5 serious concern, 8 insufficient data.

  1. 01Bedfordshire Police69.2%· 13
  2. 02North Yorkshire Police66.7%· 6
  3. 03Staffordshire Police66.7%· 3
  4. 04Dyfed-Powys Police60.0%· 5
  5. 05Durham Constabulary60.0%· 5
  6. 06Dorset Police57.1%· 7
  7. 07Cumbria Constabulary50.0%· 2
  8. 08Kent Police44.4%· 9
  9. 09Northumbria Police41.7%· 12
  10. 10Merseyside Police40.0%· 15
  11. 11South Wales Police37.5%· 16
  12. 12Devon & Cornwall Police35.3%· 17
  13. 13Greater Manchester Police33.3%· 48
  14. 14Cheshire Constabulary33.3%· 12
  15. 15Cambridgeshire Constabulary33.3%· 12
  16. 16Wiltshire Police33.3%· 9
  17. 17Humberside Police33.3%· 9
  18. 18Norfolk Constabulary33.3%· 3
  19. 19City Of London Police33.3%· 3
  20. 20Essex Police30.8%· 26
  21. 21West Mercia Police30.0%· 10
  22. 22Hampshire Constabulary30.0%· 10
  23. 23Thames Valley Police29.6%· 27
  24. 24Derbyshire Constabulary28.6%· 7
  25. 25Sussex Police26.7%· 15
  26. 26Metropolitan Police Service26.6%· 184
  27. 27West Midlands Police25.0%· 16
  28. 28Nottinghamshire Police23.1%· 13
  29. 29West Yorkshire Police22.7%· 22
  30. 30Surrey Police22.2%· 9
  31. 31Avon and Somerset Constabulary20.0%· 15
  32. 32North Wales Police20.0%· 5
  33. 33Gloucestershire Constabulary20.0%· 5
  34. 34Hertfordshire Constabulary18.2%· 11
  35. 35Northamptonshire Police16.7%· 6
  36. 36British Transport Police12.5%· 24
  37. 37Leicestershire Police0.0%· 12
  38. 38South Yorkshire Police0.0%· 10
  39. 39Suffolk Constabulary0.0%· 5
  40. 40Warwickshire Police0.0%· 3
  41. 41Lancashire0.0%· 5
  42. 42Gwent Police0.0%· 4
  43. 43Cleveland Police0.0%· 3
  44. 44Lincolnshire Police0.0%· 1
Low concernSome concernHigh concernInsufficient data

Sourcemisconduct999.com, a third-party aggregator that publishes posts on police misconduct hearings. These figures count hearings the blog has published a post about — not an official record and not the universe of recorded allegations. Data refreshed periodically; upstream scrape cadence is not independently verified. Snapshot generated .