A bunch of bullies a corrupt police…
A bunch of bullies a corrupt police force
Wir überprüfen keine spezifischen Behauptungen, da die Meinungen der Bewerter ihre eigenen sind. Wir können Bewertungen jedoch als „verifiziert” kennzeichnen, wenn wir bestätigen können, dass eine geschäftliche Interaktion stattgefunden hat. Mehr erfahren
Um die Integrität unseres Portals zu schützen, überprüft unsere automatisierte Software alle Bewertungen – unabhängig davon, ob sie verifiziert sind oder nicht – rund um die Uhr. Diese Technologie identifiziert und entfernt Inhalte, die gegen unsere Richtlinien verstoßen, wie zum Beispiel Bewertungen, die nicht auf einer wirklichen Erfahrungen basieren. Uns ist bewusst, dass wir möglicherweise nicht alles erfassen, doch Sie können uns jederzeit problematische Inhalte melden, die wir Ihrer Meinung nach übersehen haben. Mehr erfahren
Humberside Police is the territorial police force responsible for policing an area covering the East Riding of Yorkshire, the city of Kingston upon Hull, North East Lincolnshire and North Lincolnshire.
Vereinigtes Königreich
Keine Aufzeichnungen über Bewertungseinladungen
Dieses Unternehmen hat seine Kunden nicht zur Bewertungsabgabe eingeladen, daher sind die Bewertungen möglicherweise nicht repräsentativ.
So nutzt dieses Unternehmen Trustpilot
Erfahren Sie, woher die Bewertungen stammen und wie sie ausgewertet und moderiert werden.
A bunch of bullies a corrupt police force
Humberside police are an absolute joke, non of them can be bothered to do there job. Had my windscreen smashed, rang them when it happened. Been 2 months they still not come. Not bothered lookimg at my cctv even tho ive got the person doing it. Im done with them now may aswell sort stuff yourself
Left me in cell for 2/3 hours without food and a drink as was wait for a solicitor to arrive
My experience with Humberside Police's vetting and information governance processes left me with very little confidence in either transparency or fairness. The vetting process centred on a historic incident, but wider allegations also appeared to be considered despite no clear evidence ever being disclosed to me through the subsequent Subject Access Request process linking me to those claims.
The vetting process itself felt opaque from start to finish. Different information was provided at different stages, and despite pursuing the matter through appeals, I was left with more questions than answers. Senior members of the vetting panel confirmed that the "circumstances aligned to" the incident were considered, yet when I later submitted a Subject Access Request and sought clarification regarding the evidential basis for those wider allegations, I was simply told that I had received all the information I was entitled to.
The handling of my Subject Access Request was also disappointing. It took many months beyond the statutory timeframe, required repeated chasing, and was continually delayed due to internal backlogs and requests to other departments. While the force eventually provided a response, the overall process was unnecessarily prolonged and frustrating.
What concerns me most is the apparent imbalance in the way risk is assessed. National vetting standards have become increasingly stringent in response to serious misconduct cases involving serving officers. However, in my experience, the system seems capable of treating relatively minor admitted conduct and disputed allegations as part of the same overall risk picture, without providing meaningful transparency as to how those conclusions are reached.
Overall, I found the process slow, dismissive, and lacking in accountability. Based on my experience, I could not recommend applying for a role with Humberside Police while these shortcomings remain evident. Applicants invest significant time and effort into the recruitment process and deserve transparency, consistency, and fair consideration. Unfortunately, my experience left me with little confidence that those principles are being applied in practice.
And finally, looking back over the entire process, I cannot escape the feeling that once my application reached the appeal stage, the priority was no longer to assess my individual circumstances objectively. Instead, I believe those responsible for the decision were unwilling to take the perceived risk of approving my vetting, particularly in the climate created by recent national scandals. From my perspective, refusing my application was the safer institutional decision, regardless of whether the evidence justified treating my case as presenting the same level of concern. I appreciate I cannot know their motives with certainty, but that is the conclusion I have reached after reviewing all of the correspondence, the SAR, and the way my questions were answered.
Not worth calling, more likely to lock you up and use the criminal whos robbed you as a witness against you. Seen some stuff in my life but these pffft, let the locals off with everything but will have you for wearing a hooded jacket and make out that your some kind of weird burglar when your on your way to work. Lived in Hull for a bit for work and what a joke they are, I will never come back as I got hurrassed like mad by one female officer, marked my car every week for over a year with crap. They let you get victimised then when you react they come and arrest you. More interested in stopping people in cars then burglars and car thieves in the area, HU3 is riddled with crime and no cops to be seen. I started taking the approach that I will happily sit in jail then be victamised by these local inbreads, thank god I moved but damn what a joke of a police force, I would never go back there just because of these alone, your not safe or protected in your home.
I wouldn't give one star. Calling the call center I was met with I'm terminating this call. Couldn't speak to a supervisor. I was asking for a result on a case and got completely shut down.
My experience with Humberside Police and the complaints process has been deeply frustrating and has left me with no confidence in the system at all.
I reported what I believed to be an assault. CCTV footage existed, contextual footage existed, and I provided information explaining ongoing issues leading up to the incident. Despite this, only three clips were reviewed when more than twenty were available. No statement was taken from me. Witnesses who were identified at the time were not contacted. The involvement of a second participant in the incident was acknowledged in correspondence but not investigated. The decision was made based largely on one interpretation of limited CCTV.
The conclusion was that the other party acted in self-defence. This was despite the footage showing the other party approaching me on my own driveway, positioning themselves at my vehicle door, shouting and swearing, and engaging in physical contact. I disputed the interpretation at the time and provided still images taken from the same footage to show contact at face level and near-simultaneous engagement. These points were not addressed. The footage also includes the other party stating she 'belted me’, and no explanation was given for how this was reconciled with the conclusion that they were pushing me away in self-defence.
I raised a formal complaint setting out multiple concerns:
• additional CCTV footage was available but not requested
• no complainant statement was taken
• identified witnesses were not contacted
• the involvement of a second participant was not investigated
• the interpretation of the CCTV was disputed
• the assessment of self-defence did not appear to consider the full sequence of events
The complaint response concluded that the handling was appropriate.
I then requested a review by the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner. The review was upheld. The OPCC identified deficiencies and directed Humberside Police to reconsider the complaint and provide clearer reasoning.
Following this, Humberside Police issued a revised outcome. However, the reconsideration appeared to repeat much of the original response. Several allegations were repeated word for word. The same interpretation of the CCTV was relied upon. Additional footage was still not requested. Witnesses were still not contacted. The involvement of a second participant remained unaddressed.
Some determinations were changed, but without any new analysis explaining why. The reasoning itself remained materially the same.
I submitted a detailed response explaining that the recommendations from the upheld review did not appear to have been meaningfully addressed. I set out, allegation by allegation, why the reconsideration did not engage with the issues identified by the OPCC.
I was then informed that no further review was available and that the matter was closed because Humberside Police had issued a new outcome.
This effectively means:
• A complaint identified clear gaps in enquiries and reasoning
• The review agreed those issues required reconsideration
• The reconsideration repeated much of the same reasoning
• The oversight body closed the case once a new letter was issued
This leaves the impression that as long as a response is issued, the recommendations do not need to be meaningfully addressed. The process appears to focus on procedural completion rather than whether the issues identified were actually resolved.
After going through the entire process — reporting the incident, submitting a complaint, requesting a review, having that review upheld, and then challenging the reconsideration — the end result is that nothing materially changed. The same interpretation remained, the same gaps remained, and the matter was closed.
This experience has left me with no confidence that the complaints process ensures accountability. Even where a review is upheld, there appears to be no mechanism to ensure that the force meaningfully addresses the issues identified.
The officers involved included PC 2472 Daniel Cope, DS 1699 Hoyle, PS 1746 Anderson, DS 961 Joyce and Insp C Atkin.
Humberside police arrest local drug dealer one day. They then release him next, whereupon he starts dealing drugs again. The police are a waste of taxpayers money. They're only interested in fining commuters and parents taking their children to school.
Humberside police are a total waste of time and money. Completely pathetic force. Completely useless.
Can't catch a criminal or out but can get speeding car so can thief money off people. Only care when can get money scum force
Absolutely shocking police force corrupt set you with crimes you didn't commit
Funny how Humberside police only set up speed cameras across East Riding and Hull on major commuting routes like Bevrley Road during rush hour, especially first thing in the morning. They are using speeding fines as a cash cow. This is an abuse.
Note how at night-time, when driving is often far worse than during daytime, Humberside police speeding vans are nowhere to be seen. Night-time is not nearly as lucrative for them.
You never see speeding vans at accident blackspots. Only ever during rush hour to catch out hardworking, taxpaying commuters.
Humberside police do absolutely nothing to stop reckless motorbike riding without helmets on the roads and on public greenspaces. These idiots will be uninsured and devoid of road car and MOTs. The police appear unconcerned. They never deal with cyclists riding without lights in the dark. They fail to deal with motorcyclists and cyclists performing wheelies on the roads. These maniacs are left alone because there is little money in it for the police.
Humberside police are yet another wokeist police force determined only to persecute the private motorist.
Suffer a burglary, get physcially or sexually assaulted and Humberside police are nowhere to be seen, as there is not money in it for them.
Our new Reform Mayor, Luke Campbell would do well to investigate how Humberside police are currently deploying their speed cameras across Humberside in the interest of their budge, not road safety.
Time and again, we see reports of murderers and rapists remaining within the ranks, while applicants can be barred over trivial or even false allegations. The vetting unit routinely handles applications in a dismissive and opaque way, leaving us applicants frustrated and unheard. This double standard destroys public trust and discourages potential applicants from joining and making a positive difference in their communities.
Auf Trustpilot hat jeder die Möglichkeit, Bewertungen abzugeben. Der Verfasser einer Bewertung kann diese jederzeit bearbeiten oder löschen, und die Bewertungen werden angezeigt, solange der jeweilige Nutzer-Account aktiv ist.
Zum Schutz unseres Portals setzen wir auf eine Kombination aus spezialisierten Mitarbeitern und cleveren Technologien. Erfahren Sie, wie wir gefälschte Bewertungen bekämpfen.
Erfahren Sie mehr darüber, wie Bewertungen auf Trustpilot gehandhabt werden.
Hier finden Sie 8 Tipps für das Schreiben von Bewertungen.
Die Verifizierung hilft sicherzustellen, dass es sich bei den Bewertungen, die Sie auf Trustpilot lesen, um Bewertungen von echten Menschen handelt.
Anreize für das Schreiben von Bewertungen anzubieten oder selektiv zur Bewertungsabgabe einzuladen, kann den TrustScore verfälschen. Deshalb verstößt beides gegen unsere Richtlinien.