Victims' Right to Review: report, Complaints Handling and Feedback: follow-up

Key Findings

• Different approaches were applied by those undertaking reviews.
• The VRR process was robust with reviewers overturning decisions where they found the initial assessment of sufficiency and/or the public interest to be incorrect or unreasonable.
• Of the 57 applications examined, we found 91% (52) were conducted independently, thoroughly and to a high standard.
• Specialist areas of law require the reassurance of a specialist undertaking the review.
• There is a correlation between victims not being notified of decisions not to prosecute or to discontinue proceedings and delays in VRRs being submitted.
• The optimum approach would be to notify all victims of decisions not to prosecute.
• There was a commitment in the Response and Information Unit ( RIU) to conduct full and thorough reviews and responses were generally empathetic. In the majority of the 57 applications reviewed, efforts had been made to respond to all issues raised and where there was fault or poor service, it was generally acknowledged, often with an apology.
• 70% (40) of the responses were issued more than 20 working days after receipt of the application.