Investigations in the public interestEvidence. Enquiry. Accountability.

CPN appeal · Named accountability

Ian McIver

Jump to all 5 questions addressed to this recipient →

Community Safety & Public Health Lead Officer, Torridge District Council, in the June 2026 correspondence · Bideford, Devon

The individual finding. The footage. The five-year decision.

Professional identity and role in the record

The 2 June 2026 email identifies Ian McIver as Community Safety & Public Health Lead Officer. He is the named authorising officer on the 29 May CPN and appears on the August 2024 warning. His Council correspondence gives Riverbank House, Bideford. The role is identified at the dates of those documents.

CPN and Council correspondence, PDF pages 20–28 and 96–99

Answer the evidence and the decision.

Miss E and Mr J challenge a process they say did not obtain their evidence before issuing restrictions. Their allegation of collusion is put against the dated correspondence and the assessment of competing accounts not supplied in the reviewed record. The questions below identify this recipient’s responsibility and the records needed to examine it.

Read the Mayo–police correspondence →

The direct questions

Prepared 23 September 2026; not yet sent by this publication. Historical requests and official replies are set out in the linked reporting.

CPN-01

What did Miss E personally do?

To: Ian McIver · Torridge District Council

Identify each act attributed to Miss E, its date and the evidence connecting her personally to it. Where is the finding separating her conduct from Mr J’s or anyone else’s? Being the resident or owner is not an explanation of what she did.

PDF pages 1–16 and 20–28 · Read the context

CPN-02

Where is the invitation to give their evidence?

To: Bradley Ithildîn · Ian McIver · Devon and Cornwall Police · Torridge District Council

Miss E and Mr J say neither was asked to give evidence about the incidents for this notice-making process before the notices arrived. Produce any dated invitation, interview, account obtained and assessment of their response. If none was sought, explain how their account was tested before action was taken.

Grounds and supplemental statement; PDF pages 64–80; Mr J’s account, 23 September 2026 · Read the context

CPN-03

Independent assessment—or a process shaped around Mayo’s case?

To: Bradley Ithildîn · Ian McIver · Devon and Cornwall Police · Torridge District Council

Answer Miss E and Mr J’s allegation of collusion. In the 31 July and 2 August emails, the ASB route is discussed alongside Mayo’s injunction and his statement and exhibits are sent as the evidence. What independent checks tested that material, what contrary evidence was considered, and where is the record showing that the decision was not simply driven by one litigant’s account?

PDF pages 70, 74 and 80 · Read the context

CPN-05

Why five years? Where is the proportionate decision?

To: Ian McIver · Torridge District Council

Produce the recorded reasons for a five-year notice and each restriction imposed. What current conduct, recurrence risk, individual circumstances and alternatives were assessed? What did the decision-maker do with Miss E’s account that she sought protection rather than obstructed legitimate access?

PDF pages 1–16 and 20–28 · Read the context

CPN-10

Show the footage behind the decision.

To: Ian McIver · Torridge District Council

Identify and disclose the complete recording and audio relied on for the 29 May 2026 notice, with its provenance, date and any relevant surrounding sequence. Where does it show Miss E’s alleged conduct, who viewed it, and what opportunity was she given to answer it?

PDF pages 24–28; EE9 at page 19 · Read the context

Response and records

Read the existing response record · Provide a response or source document.

The complete question index

Questions across the case

5 existing questions addressed to Ian McIver. Each link opens its full wording, source and response position.

Filter the full register for this recipient