None

Financial penalty

Reprimand, no fine

2 March 2023

Date on the register

UK GDPR

Law relied on

DPA 2018 section 38

Criminal justice

Sector

26 actions on the register

In one line

The ICO issued Metropolitan Police Service with a reprimand on 2 March 2023 under the UK General Data Protection Regulation. No financial penalty attaches to it.

01The record

Organisation named: Metropolitan Police Service
Action: Reprimand
Date published: 2 March 2023
Register year: 2023
Law relied on: UK GDPR
Provisions cited: DPA 2018 section 38
Penalty: None (not a financial penalty)
Sector on the register: Criminal justice
ICO register reference: 17261
Register status: Published on the ICO enforcement register, 4 September 2026
Notice documents: 1 PDF published by the ICO
Sector share of register: 26 of 216 actions (12%)
Actions published that year: 80
Actions under this law: 95
Position on the register: 36th of 216, oldest first
Published the same day: This entry alone

02What happened, and where it sits

Metropolitan Police Service received an ICO reprimand on 2 March 2023. The Commissioner acted under the UK General Data Protection Regulation, citing DPA 2018 section 38. A formal criticism on the public record. A reprimand carries no fine and no order, but it is published and the ICO expects the shortcomings named in it to be fixed.

No sum is attached to this action. Reprimands are corrective, not financial, which is why Metropolitan Police Service appears on the register without a figure beside it.

Metropolitan Police Service is filed under Criminal justice, which accounts for 26 of the 216 actions on the register (12%). In 2023 the ICO published 80 enforcement actions in total, 37 of them reprimands. 95 actions on the register name UK GDPR.

Counted from the oldest entry forward, this is the 36th of 216 actions on the register and the 4th of 26 in Criminal justice. The ICO publishes one document for this action, 399 KB in total: "Mps Reprimand INV07262020". It is the authority for everything on this page.

03The ICO's own account

MPS was unable to ensure that sensitive criminal records were not able to be uploaded correctly to the Police National Database (PND), or amended, or deleted and that this situation had been in place, unknown to MPS for some considerable time. The consequences of this failure cannot be measured but had the potential to cause significant damage. Of particular concern was that, even though PND had been operational since 2011 MPS had not developed any automated system of checks to ensure that the vast number of criminal record files that were uploaded daily to PND were correctly loaded. In the response to enquiries, MPS described the system of checks at the time of the incident as “immature”. This is concerning given the length of time that PND had been operational when the incident was discovered.

Quoted from the ICO's published register entry (ico.org.uk), Open Government Licence v3.0.

The law behind this action

UK GDPR

The UK GDPR is the data protection regime the ICO enforces against controllers and processors. Its upper tier is capped at £17.5 million or 4% of total worldwide annual turnover, whichever is higher.

All 95 register actions under UK GDPR

What a reprimand does

A formal criticism on the public record. A reprimand carries no fine and no order, but it is published and the ICO expects the shortcomings named in it to be fixed.

Published notice

PDFMps Reprimand INV07262020(399 KB)

04Nearest entries on the register

Closest by sector, law and date
Organisation	Date	Action	Law	Penalty	Sector
Surrey Police	3 Apr 2023	Reprimand	UK GDPR	-	Criminal justice
Sussex Police	3 Apr 2023	Reprimand	UK GDPR	-	Criminal justice
Thames Valley Police	30 May 2023	Reprimand	UK GDPR	-	Criminal justice
Nottinghamshire Police	21 Jun 2023	Reprimand	UK GDPR	-	Criminal justice
Ministry of Justice	8 Sep 2023	Reprimand	UK GDPR	-	Criminal justice

All Criminal justice actions/All 2023 actions/The full register

05Work out an exposure of your own

Article 83 fine calculator

Estimate upper and lower tier exposure from turnover and infringement type, on the same scale the ICO works to.

How a fine is calculated

The Article 83(2) factors, the turnover caps, and how a regulator gets from a contravention to a number.

The ICO profile

How the UK regulator works post-Brexit, the £17.5M and £8.7M UK GDPR caps, and its divergence from the EU regime.

Provenance and independence

Source: ICO enforcement register (ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/enforcement/), as published on 4 September 2026. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.

GDPRFine.com is an independent tracker of ICO enforcement. It is not affiliated with, endorsed by or connected to the Information Commissioner's Office, and it uses no ICO branding. Where the ICO's own wording is reproduced it is quoted and attributed; everything else on these pages is our own summary of the published record.

The ICO's register held 222 entries on that date. 6 of them are prosecutions of named individuals, with ages and home towns in the ICO's own summary. This tracker indexes organisations, so those 6 are excluded and every count on these pages is out of 216. They remain on the ICO's own register.

An entry says what the Commissioner did on the date shown. It is not a statement about the organisation today, and the ICO can amend or remove a register entry at any time. Amounts and provisions are as published by the ICO; where the published notice does not state a figure or name a provision, these pages say so rather than filling the gap. This entry was read from the register page at https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/enforcement/2023/03/metropolitan-police-service-reprimand/.