Police chief mauled by watchdog over £11,000 ‘executive coaching’

he told his employer about the arrangement at the time but NYPA chief executive Jeremy Holderness disputed this. The payments to the company were first flagged up internally in 2009 when it was recognised procurement rules, including getting three quotes, had not been followed.

According to the IPCC report, chief constable Grahame Maxwell formally admonished Mr Briggs as his line manager but no misconduct action was taken. The agreement was then retrospectively approved.

NYPA revisited the issue in 2010 after being alerted by a freedom of information request but in January 2011 ultimately decided Mr Maxwell’s advice was sufficient sanction.

Mr Briggs then abruptly retired amid some acrimony after he publicly criticised NYPA for resurrecting a matter he believed had been dealt with in 2009.

Last February, only days after his departure, the IPCC began its probe, raising serious concerns over spending controls and criticising Mr Briggs for declining to answer questions.

The report says: “It is inconceivable that whilst holding the second highest position in NYP, Mr Briggs did not know of the force and Authority procurement and tendering requirements. He chose not to comply with them and this is of concern. It is unlikely that Mr Briggs claim for the training will withstand public scrutiny.

“Mr Briggs was in public office and he should have been acting in a financially responsible way, which was open, transparent and auditable.”

The police authority is also held to task with the report concluding: “It is unacceptable that the extensive allowance Mr Briggs received for personal development training and medical insurance was not to be audited from the outset so cannot now be accounted for.”

NYPA chief executive Jeremy Holderness said “…in our view, it is disproportionate to say that the arrangements were ‘unacceptable’.”

Mr Briggs said: “I regard the IPCC inquiry as a vindictive act and I was not prepared to be a party to it as the appropriate bodies had already concluded no further action was required. It has taken the IPCC 12 months to conclude this matter and I am astonished that they felt it necessary to conduct themselves in this way.”