Police Final
Written Warning
A final written warning is the second of the four disciplinary actions in the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2020 (regulation 2(1)). It stays live for 2 years from the day you are told of it, or up to 5 years if a hearing sets a longer period (regulations 42(9), 42(10) and 62(4)). This guide explains when it can be given, how the time runs, what a second case means, and how it touches promotion, transfer, vetting and appeals.
Independent information, not advice · Sources checked 3 October 2026 · England and Wales unless stated
It can be given at a misconduct meeting, at a hearing where misconduct is found and, since 28 May 2025, for gross misconduct only where exceptional circumstances justify it instead of dismissal. It lasts 2 years from notification, or up to 5 if a hearing or accelerated hearing decides, and career breaks do not count. While it is live, any new misconduct case goes to a public hearing where neither warning can be given again.
A final written warning at a glance
This page goes deeper on one outcome. For all four sanctions side by side, see police misconduct sanctions explained. Everything below is written from the regulations as amended to 3 October 2026 and applies to police officers and special constables in England and Wales. Police staff are dealt with under their force's own disciplinary procedures, which this page does not cover.
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| What it is | The second of four disciplinary actions, after a written warning (regulation 2(1)) |
| Who can give it | A misconduct meeting; a misconduct hearing; an accelerated misconduct hearing (gross misconduct, exceptional circumstances only) |
| How long it lasts | 2 years beginning with the day it is notified to you (regulation 42(9)(b)) |
| Longer period | Up to 5 years, set by a hearing or accelerated hearing when it gives the warning (regulations 42(10) and 62(4)); not available at a meeting |
| Paused by | Career breaks only (regulations 42(11) and 62(5)) |
| When it is barred | If you already had a final written warning in force on the date of the severity assessment for the new case (regulations 42(8) and 62(3)) |
| Effect on a new case | A new misconduct case must go to a public hearing, and only reduction in rank or dismissal remain if misconduct is found |
| Promotion | Not eligible for NPPF step one (sergeant and inspector) while live |
| Vetting | Mandatory vetting review after the proceedings, for cases concluded from 13 July 2026 |
| Appeal | Meeting: internal appeal within 7 working days. Hearing or accelerated hearing: Police Appeals Tribunal within 10 working days |
Almost every rule about a live warning turns on whether it was in force on the date of the severity assessment for the new case (regulation 14(1)), not the date of the new conduct and not the date of the later meeting or hearing. If you remember one thing from this page, make it that. Your representative can ask the professional standards department for that date in writing.
When a final written warning can be given
Where misconduct or gross misconduct is found, the person or panel must impose disciplinary action (regulation 42(1), as amended from 28 May 2025). Which outcomes are on the table depends on the type of proceedings and what was found.
| Proceedings | Finding | Final written warning? | Length | Rule |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Misconduct meeting | Misconduct found | Yes | Exactly 2 years | Regulation 42(2) and (9)(b) |
| Misconduct hearing | Misconduct found | Yes, unless a final written warning was live at the severity assessment | 2 to 5 years | Regulation 42(3)(a), (8), (10) |
| Misconduct hearing | Gross misconduct found | Only if exceptional circumstances justify it instead of dismissal | 2 to 5 years | Regulation 42(3)(b), (8), (10) |
| Accelerated misconduct hearing | Gross misconduct found | Only if exceptional circumstances justify it instead of dismissal | 2 to 5 years | Regulation 62(1), (3), (4) |
| Any proceedings against a former officer | Gross misconduct found | No: the only disciplinary action is a finding that they would have been dismissed | Not applicable | Schedule 1 to the Conduct Regulations |
At a misconduct meeting
A meeting deals only with misconduct (not gross misconduct) and can give only a written warning or a final written warning (regulation 42(2)). It is the most serious outcome a meeting can impose, and a meeting has no power to set a longer period: the warning is 2 years. Meetings are held in private (regulation 39(2)) and the outcome report is not published. See misconduct meeting vs hearing for who sits and how the meeting runs.
At a misconduct hearing: misconduct found
A hearing can find misconduct rather than the gross misconduct that was alleged. If it does, a written warning or final written warning is available, and reduction in rank or dismissal only where a final written warning was already live at the severity assessment or the finding covers more than one incident not closely factually connected (regulation 42(3)(a), (5) and (6)). Because the panel chooses the least severe outcome that deals adequately with the case, a final written warning is often the realistic outcome when a gross misconduct allegation ends in a misconduct finding.
At a hearing or accelerated hearing: gross misconduct found
Only where the panel is satisfied there are exceptional circumstances that justify it instead of dismissal (regulations 42(3)(b) and 62(1)). This is covered in the next section. A written warning is never available for gross misconduct.
When it cannot be given
- If you already had a final written warning in force on the date of the severity assessment for the new case (regulation 42(8); regulation 62(3) for accelerated hearings).
- Against a former officer: the only disciplinary action is a finding that they would have been dismissed (Schedule 1 to the Conduct Regulations; College of Policing outcomes guidance, paragraphs 3.30 to 3.33).
- Where the conduct is found to be neither misconduct nor gross misconduct: the matter goes to the reflective practice review process or no further action (regulation 42(1A)). See reflective practice explained.
Home Office guidance (paragraphs 4.87 to 4.90) says the chief officer can choose between the misconduct procedures and regulation 13 of the Police Regulations 2003 for a probationer's misconduct. Gross misconduct should ordinarily go through the misconduct procedures, and disputed misconduct will in most cases do so too. A finding during probation can also feed into whether you are likely to become a well-conducted officer. See regulation 13 explained.
Final written warnings for gross misconduct since 28 May 2025
Before 28 May 2025, a panel that found gross misconduct could choose freely between a final written warning, reduction in rank and dismissal without notice (regulation 42(3)(b) as it stood on 27 May 2025). The Police (Conduct, Performance and Complaints and Misconduct) (Amendment) Regulations 2025 changed that. Now:
- Dismissal is the default. The disciplinary action must be dismissal without notice, unless the panel is satisfied that there are exceptional circumstances which justify a final written warning or reduction in rank (regulations 42(3)(b) and 62(1)).
- Reasons are compulsory. If gross misconduct is found and the officer is not dismissed, the outcome report must give the reasons for that decision (regulations 43(1)(e) and 63(1)(d)).
- The police and crime commissioner sees it. A copy of that report must go to the local policing body where it is not itself the appropriate authority (regulations 43(5)(c) and 63(4)(c)).
- It is usually public. Hearings are held in public (regulation 39(1)) and the chair must normally require the report to be published on the force website for at least 28 days, subject to the harm test and redactions (regulations 43(6) to (8) and 63(5) to (7)).
- A live final written warning removes the option. If you already had one in force at the severity assessment, a second cannot be given (regulations 42(8) and 62(3)), so the exceptional circumstances route leaves only reduction in rank, which is not available to constables or to anyone previously reduced in rank (regulations 42(13) and 62(7)).
The amendments do not apply to an allegation that came to the attention of a local policing body, chief officer or the IOPC before 28 May 2025, or to a later linked allegation while that earlier one is still being handled under the old rules (SI 2025/558, regulation 64(1)). They do apply where the IOPC orders a re-investigation or applies Part 2 of the Police Reform Act 2002 to an old case (regulation 64(2)). If your allegation is older than 28 May 2025, ask your representative which version of regulation 42 applies: under the old version a final written warning for gross misconduct needs no exceptional circumstances.
The regulations do not define "exceptional circumstances", and we found no official guidance that does. The College of Policing outcomes guidance was written before the change. It already said reduction in rank (and by extension anything less than dismissal) cannot be a "softer option" or given out of sympathy, that the seriousness of the misconduct comes first, and that personal mitigation cannot justify a lesser outcome where nothing less than dismissal would maintain public confidence (paragraphs 3.19 and 6.6). Expect panels to read "exceptional" strictly.
Since 29 September 2026, the Police Act 1996 also allows rules to be made letting chief officers, police and crime commissioners (for chief officer cases) and the IOPC (where it presented the case) appeal to the Police Appeals Tribunal, and a tribunal order that dismisses an officer who was not originally dismissed takes effect on the day it is made (section 85(1A) to (1C) and Schedule 6, paragraph 7(4)). When we checked, the Police Appeals Tribunals Rules 2020 had not yet been amended to bring those appeals into use. Once they are, a final written warning given for gross misconduct could in principle be challenged by the force or the IOPC. For the wider picture see gross misconduct explained and gross misconduct examples and outcomes.
How long it lasts and how the extension works
Regulation 42(9)(b) sets the basic period: a final written warning "remains in force" for 2 years beginning with the day it was notified to you. On top of that:
- Misconduct meeting: 2 years, no more and no less. The power to set a longer period applies only where the warning is given at a hearing under regulation 42(3).
- Misconduct hearing: the people deciding disciplinary action may extend the 2 year period to a maximum of 5 years (regulation 42(10)). Home Office guidance describes this as the panel deciding the length, from a minimum of 2 years to a maximum of 5 (paragraph 11.125).
- Accelerated misconduct hearing: 2 years, or such longer period as the panel decides, up to 5 years from the day it was notified (regulation 62(4)).
When setting the length, Home Office guidance (paragraph 11.127), repeated in the College of Policing outcomes guidance (paragraph 3.16), says the panel should take into account:
- the seriousness of the conduct;
- the circumstances that gave rise to the misconduct;
- the public interest;
- your mitigation, including your previous record of conduct.
Because the length is decided at the same time as the sanction, the time to argue for 2 years rather than a longer period is in your representations on outcome, which you or your representative must be given the chance to make (regulations 42(14)(c) and 62(10)(c)).
Some forces and older material still talk about "extending" a final written warning when new misconduct happens. That was a separate outcome under the 2012 regulations (a one-off 18 month extension in exceptional circumstances). Under the 2020 regulations we found no power to lengthen a warning that is already running. If a final written warning is live at the severity assessment for a new case, the warnings are simply off the table for that case (regulation 42(8)).
What 'live' means and how the time is counted
The regulations say "in force"; most officers and forces say "live". A warning is live from the day it is notified until the end of its period. The table follows a typical case through the dates that matter.
| Stage | What happens | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| Allegation is assessed | The appropriate authority makes the severity assessment: misconduct, gross misconduct or neither (regulation 14(1)) | This is the date that decides whether an earlier warning was 'in force' |
| Case to answer | The authority decides the form of proceedings (regulation 23(10)) | A live final written warning at the severity assessment means a hearing |
| Outcome given | The meeting or panel imposes the warning and, at a hearing, its length | The warning period begins with the day it is notified to you (regulation 42(9)) |
| Within 5 working days | The chair submits the outcome report (regulations 43(1) and 63(1)); 10 working days where a legally qualified person prepares it | You receive a copy with notice of your right of appeal |
| 7 or 10 working days | Meeting appeal deadline (regulation 45(3)) or Police Appeals Tribunal deadline (rule 9) | Count from the dates in those provisions, not from the meeting |
| After the proceedings conclude | Vetting authority must assess your clearance (regulation 5A(3), cases concluded from 13 July 2026) | Conditions can be added or clearance reviewed |
| 2 years (or the longer period set) | The warning stops being in force | Add any time spent on a career break |
Career breaks
Any time when you are on a career break under regulation 33(12) of the Police Regulations 2003 does not count towards the period, including any longer period set by a hearing (regulations 42(11) and 62(5)). Home Office guidance says the same (paragraphs 10.55 and 11.131). In practice the expiry date moves back by the length of the break.
Other absences
The regulations exclude only career breaks. We found nothing that pauses the clock for sickness absence, parental leave, secondment or suspension, so on the wording those periods count towards the 2 years. If your force has calculated your expiry date differently, ask it to explain the basis in writing.
The severity assessment test, both ways
Because the test is whether the warning was in force on the date of the severity assessment for the new case (regulations 23(10)(b) and 42(5) and (8)), two results follow from the wording:
- A warning that has since expired can still count. If the new allegation was assessed while your final written warning was live, the hearing rule and the bar on warnings apply even if the warning has run out by the time of the hearing.
- A warning given later does not count for an earlier assessment. If the new allegation was assessed before your final written warning was imposed (for example, two investigations running side by side), the warning was not in force on that date, so regulations 42(5) and 42(8) do not apply to that case. The panel must still have regard to your record of police service, which by then includes the warning (regulation 42(14)(a)).
The severity assessment can be revised at any time before proceedings start (regulation 14(6)). The regulations do not say whether a revision changes the relevant date; see the "What we could not verify" section.
A second allegation while the warning is live
This is the reason a final written warning matters more than its name suggests. Home Office guidance says an officer given one should be told that any future misconduct may result in dismissal (paragraph 10.52). The regulations make that real:
- Not every new issue becomes a case. If the new conduct is assessed as neither misconduct nor gross misconduct, it can go to the reflective practice review process, the performance or vetting procedures, or no further action (regulation 14(2) and (4)). A live warning does not change that assessment, though aggravating history can be relevant to it.
- If it is assessed as misconduct, it must be a hearing. Where a final written warning was in force at the severity assessment, the proceedings must be a misconduct hearing, even for misconduct (regulation 23(10)(b)). Hearings are in public (regulation 39(1)) and you can be legally represented.
- Neither warning is available. A written warning and a final written warning are both barred (regulation 42(8)).
- Reduction in rank or dismissal become available for misconduct. Regulation 42(5) switches on reduction in rank and dismissal without notice for a misconduct finding (regulation 42(3)(a)(iii) and (iv)).
- For a constable, that means dismissal if misconduct is found. Reduction in rank cannot apply to the lowest rank, and it is also unavailable to anyone already reduced in rank under the 2004 or 2020 regulations (regulation 42(13)). Because disciplinary action must be imposed once misconduct is found (regulation 42(1)), the real contest is often whether the conduct is misconduct at all.
- If the new matter is gross misconduct, dismissal is the default, and the exceptional circumstances route can only lead to reduction in rank, because a second final written warning is barred (regulations 42(8) and 62(3)).
The outcome of a second case is decided at the end, but the route is fixed at the severity assessment and the case to answer decision. Talk to your Federation representative as soon as you receive a regulation 17 notice, not when the hearing date arrives. Representation options are in Federation representation and legal support and solicitors and legal cover.
Final written warning vs written warning
The two warnings look similar on paper but behave very differently if anything else goes wrong.
| Written warning | Final written warning | |
|---|---|---|
| Rank among sanctions | Least serious | Second least serious |
| Live period | 18 months, fixed (regulation 42(9)(a)) | 2 years, or up to 5 at a hearing or accelerated hearing |
| Available for gross misconduct | No | Only in exceptional circumstances (since 28 May 2025) |
| Available at an accelerated hearing | No | Yes, exceptional circumstances only |
| Barred when | A written warning or final written warning was in force at the severity assessment (regulation 42(7) and (8)) | A final written warning was in force at the severity assessment (regulation 42(8)) |
| Next misconduct case while live | Can still go to a meeting; the minimum outcome becomes a final written warning | Must go to a hearing; only reduction in rank or dismissal remain |
| What Home Office guidance says it signals | Misconduct while it is live is likely to lead to at least a final written warning (para 10.52) | You should be told that any future misconduct may result in dismissal (para 10.52) |
| NPPF promotion eligibility while live | Not eligible | Not eligible |
| Vetting review afterwards | Yes | Yes |
One consequence: if you had a written warning in force at the severity assessment for a new case and misconduct is found, a written warning cannot be given again (regulation 42(7)), so the minimum outcome is a final written warning. Two misconduct findings in quick succession can move you from no record to a final written warning without any single incident being especially serious.
What happens at expiry and how it is recorded
- While it is live. Home Office guidance says notification of the warning, with the date issued and the expiry date, is recorded on your personal record with a copy of the written outcome and a summary of the matter (paragraphs 10.53 and 11.129). Your personal record is kept under regulation 15 of the Police Regulations 2003.
- At expiry. The warning is no longer "in force", so it no longer sends a later case to a hearing, bars a written warning or opens up reduction in rank and dismissal for misconduct. It also stops counting against NPPF step one eligibility.
- It does not vanish. Regulation 15 of the Police Regulations 2003 contains expungement rules, but they refer only to sanctions under the 1999, 2004 and 2008 conduct regulations. We found no equivalent rule for warnings under the 2020 regulations. The College's vetting guidance says professional standards departments weed misconduct history before sharing it with another force "in accordance with national retention guidelines" (Vetting APP 7.5.1.i), which we could not locate.
- It can still be relevant later. Any later panel must have regard to your record of police service (regulation 42(14)(a)), and the College's outcomes guidance cites case law treating previous disciplinary matters as an aggravating factor. Equally, a long period of good service since an old matter is the kind of intervening conduct the guidance asks panels to take into account (paragraph 4.82).
If you want to know exactly what is held about you and for how long, you can ask your force's professional standards department about its retention policy, and you have a right of access to your personal data under data protection law.
What a final written warning does and does not affect
A summary of the knock-on effects. Where the answer depends on force policy, the table says so rather than guessing. The detail is in the next section.
| Area | Affected? | How |
|---|---|---|
| Rank and basic pay | No change | A warning does not reduce rank or move your pay point |
| Pay increments | No direct effect | Annex F pay progression conditions do not include misconduct outcomes; how your PDR reflects the matter is for your force |
| Pension | No direct effect | Pay and rank are unchanged; pension forfeiture is tied to certain criminal convictions, not warnings |
| Promotion to sergeant or inspector | Yes, while live | NPPF step one requires no live written warning, final written warning or extended final written warning |
| Other promotion and temporary promotion | Possibly | Set by force policy; we found no national rule |
| Transfer to another force | Yes | The warning moves with you, is shared with the receiving force and the new force must grant its own clearance |
| Vetting clearance | Yes | A review is mandatory after proceedings concluded from 13 July 2026; higher clearance can be downgraded |
| Specialist posts needing higher vetting | Possibly | If clearance is downgraded, the force must try to find a suitable role at the lower level (Vetting APP 7.3.2) |
| Firearms, driving and other authorisations | Possibly | No national rule found; decided under force policy, often on the facts rather than the sanction |
| Giving evidence in criminal cases | Possibly | A relevant misconduct finding may have to be revealed to the CPS; findings about honesty or integrity always should be |
| Future misconduct cases | Yes, while live | Compulsory hearing; warnings barred; reduction in rank or dismissal for misconduct |
| Barred list | No | Only dismissal (or a 'would have been dismissed' finding) leads to the barred list |
| Publication | Hearings only | Hearing and accelerated hearing reports are normally published for at least 28 days; meetings are private |
Promotion, transfer, specialist roles and vetting in detail
Promotion
The College of Policing's NPPF step two candidate handbook (updated 10 September 2026) says that to sit the sergeants' or inspectors' legal examination you must meet the NPPF step one eligibility criteria, which include having no live written warning, final written warning or extended final written warning issued under the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2020. Your line manager must confirm eligibility, and the handbook says a result obtained when not eligible will be voided. In practice that means waiting until the warning expires before entering step one.
For promotion beyond inspector, temporary promotion and acting ranks, we found no national rule tied to a warning; these are for force policy. Reflective practice, unlike a warning, cannot be used to stop a promotion (regulation 66(3)). More in can I be promoted with a misconduct finding.
Transfer to another force
Home Office guidance says a live warning transfers with you, stays live until it expires, and should be referred to in any reference before you transfer (paragraphs 10.54 and 11.130). Your personal record moves to the new force (Police Regulations 2003, regulation 16). The receiving force must request your full complaint and misconduct history from every force you have served in (Vetting APP 7.5.1.h), and since 13 July 2026 it cannot appoint you unless its own vetting authority has granted clearance no more than six months before appointment (Vetting Regulations, regulation 5C). A live final written warning does not legally bar a transfer, but the receiving force decides whether to accept you. See transferring with live misconduct.
Vetting review
Where you have been subject to a misconduct meeting, hearing or accelerated hearing and have not been dismissed, the vetting authority must assess whether there is information indicating you may no longer be suitable to hold vetting clearance, or whether a condition should be added, varied or removed (Police (Vetting) Regulations 2025, regulation 5A(3)). This does not apply where the proceedings concluded before 13 July 2026 (SI 2026/653, regulation 28(4)). The College's vetting guidance calls this a focused vetting review and says it must take place after misconduct proceedings that end in any sanction other than dismissal (Vetting APP 7.3.1). It also says the vetting review is a separate process that must not be used to get round the protections of the misconduct procedure (7.3.4). If clearance is withdrawn, the Vetting Regulations lead to dismissal. See failing vetting as a serving officer.
Specialist posts and authorisations
Some specialist posts need management vetting (MV) rather than recruitment vetting (RV). The vetting guidance says MV clearance can be downgraded after a misconduct review, and the force must then make every reasonable effort to find a suitable alternative role at RV level; if none is available, or you are no longer suitable for RV, the guidance says you will be subject to dismissal (Vetting APP 7.3.2). We found no national rule in the regulations that removes a firearms, driving or other operational authority because of a final written warning as such. Those decisions sit with force policy and the relevant authorising officer, and often turn on what the misconduct was about rather than the label of the sanction.
Giving evidence
The CPS Disclosure Manual (Chapter 18) says officers reveal relevant misconduct findings to the prosecutor on form MG6B, that a finding relating to honesty or integrity should always be revealed because it can affect credibility, and that your professional standards department advises at the end of proceedings whether, for how long and in what kinds of case the information should be revealed. Whether the CPS then discloses it to the defence is a case by case decision. The College's vetting guidance warns that this can affect deployment in roles in the evidence chain (Vetting APP 8.6.3).
Pay and references
Your rank and pay point do not change, and a misconduct outcome is not one of the four conditions of the pay progression standard in Annex F to the Police Regulations 2003. For references outside policing we found no national rule; what a force says is a matter for its own policy.
What pushes a case towards or away from a final written warning
Panels must have regard to the College of Policing's Guidance on outcomes in police misconduct proceedings (Police Act 1996, section 87). The latest edition we could read is the 2022 one. It sets three stages: assess the seriousness of the misconduct, keep in mind the purpose of sanctions, and choose the outcome that most appropriately fulfils that purpose, starting with the least severe (paragraph 4.2). Seriousness is assessed by culpability, harm, aggravating factors and mitigating factors (paragraph 4.3).
Two practical points. First, mitigation raised late, when it could reasonably have been raised earlier, can be given less weight (regulation 42(14)(d)), so disclose relevant health or welfare factors early, through your representative if you prefer. Second, the guidance's list of especially serious categories, including operational dishonesty, misuse of police information, violence, intimidation or sexual impropriety, abuse of a position of trust and discrimination, is where a final written warning is least likely and dismissal most likely. For more on how those categories play out, see gross misconduct examples and outcomes.
If stress is building while you wait, confidential support is listed in the police mental health support directory.
How often final written warnings are given
The Home Office headline bulletin groups final written warnings with written warnings, but its data tables split them. These are police officers in cases finalised in the year to 31 March 2025 (Tables MP4 and MP5), counted per proceeding. All of them predate the 28 May 2025 dismissal presumption.
| Outcome | Meeting | Hearing | Accelerated hearing | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Final written warning | 93 | 85 | 24 | 202 |
| of which after a gross misconduct finding | Not possible | 58 | 24 | 82 |
| Written warning | 361 | 21 | 0 | 382 |
| Officers in proceedings (all outcomes) | 724 | 539 | 424 | 1,687 |
- About 1 in 8 officers at a meeting (93 of 724) received a final written warning; written warnings were about four times as common there.
- At hearings and accelerated hearings, final written warnings far outnumbered written warnings, as you would expect where the allegation was gross misconduct.
- 82 final written warnings followed a gross misconduct finding: 58 of the 371 officers found to have committed gross misconduct at a hearing and 24 of the 419 at accelerated hearings. Since 28 May 2025 each of those would need exceptional circumstances, so we expect the number to fall. No figures for the period after the change had been published when we checked.
Wider outcome figures are in misconduct outcomes and statistics.
Worked scenarios
Illustrative examples, not real cases, to show how the rules combine. They do not predict any outcome.
Appealing a final written warning
You can appeal the sanction even if you admitted the conduct. The route depends on where the warning was given.
After a misconduct meeting (constable to chief superintendent)
- What you can appeal: the disciplinary action if you admitted misconduct; the finding or the disciplinary action if you denied it (regulation 45(1)).
- Grounds: the finding or disciplinary action was unreasonable; there is evidence that could not reasonably have been considered at the meeting which could have materially affected it; or a serious breach of procedure or other unfairness which could have materially affected it (regulation 45(2)).
- Deadline: written notice to the appropriate authority before the end of 7 working days beginning with the first working day after you are given the outcome report, stating your grounds and whether you want a meeting. The authority can extend this for exceptional circumstances (regulation 45(3)).
- Who decides: someone at least one rank above the person who held the meeting, or a more senior staff member unless the case substantially involves operational policing (regulation 45(4)). You can object to them within 3 working days (regulation 45(7)).
- Possible results: confirm or reverse the decision, or deal with you in any way the meeting could have (regulation 47(1)). That means a final written warning can be reduced to a written warning, and a written warning can be increased to a final written warning (Home Office guidance, paragraph 25.18). The decision takes effect from the date of the original outcome notice (regulation 47(3)).
Senior officers (above chief superintendent) appeal a meeting outcome to the Police Appeals Tribunal instead (Police Appeals Tribunals Rules 2020, rule 4(2)(b)).
After a misconduct hearing or accelerated hearing
- Where: the Police Appeals Tribunal (rule 4).
- Grounds: the same three types: unreasonable finding or disciplinary action, new evidence, or breach of procedure or unfairness that could have materially affected the result (rule 4(4)).
- If you accepted the conduct: you cannot appeal the finding, but you can still appeal the disciplinary action, including the length of a final written warning (rule 4(1)(b) and (3)).
- Deadline: notice to the local policing body before the end of 10 working days beginning with the first working day after you are first supplied with a written copy of the decision (rule 9(1)). Late notice is possible only within a reasonable time and if it was not reasonably practicable to meet the deadline (rule 10).
- What the tribunal can do: deal with you in any way the original panel could have (Police Act 1996, section 85(2)). You normally pay your own costs unless the tribunal directs otherwise (Schedule 6, paragraph 9).
Appealing a warning does not pause the vetting review or the eligibility rules; the warning stands unless and until it is overturned. More in the misconduct appeal process guide and Police Appeals Tribunal decisions analysis.
Older cases under the 2012 regulations
The 2020 regulations apply to allegations that first came to the attention of a local policing body or chief officer on or after 1 February 2020. Older allegations, and some linked later ones, are still handled under the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2012 (2020 regulations, regulations 2(1) and 3(2)). A few very old cases are still reaching proceedings, so if yours started before 2020, check which rules apply.
| 2012 regulations | 2020 regulations | |
|---|---|---|
| Which cases | Allegations that first came to the attention of the force or PCC before 1 February 2020, and some linked later allegations (2020 regs, reg 3(2)) | Allegations from 1 February 2020 |
| Written warning | 12 months from taking effect (reg 3(3)(a)) | 18 months from notification |
| Final written warning | 18 months from taking effect (reg 3(3)(b)) | 2 years from notification, up to 5 at a hearing |
| Extension | Where a final written warning was in force when new conduct was assessed, it could be extended by 18 months in exceptional circumstances, once only (reg 35(7) to (9)) | No later extension; the length is set when the warning is given |
| Other outcomes | Management advice; dismissal with notice (minimum 28 days); no reduction in rank (reg 35(3) and (4)) | No management advice or dismissal with notice; reduction in rank available |
| Misconduct with a live final written warning | Dismissal available, or extension of the warning (reg 35(5) and (7)) | Reduction in rank or dismissal only |
| Gross misconduct | Any outcome on the list could be given; dismissal had to be without notice (reg 35(3)(b) and (10)) | Dismissal unless exceptional circumstances (since 28 May 2025) |
The NPPF eligibility wording quoted above refers to warnings under the 2020 regulations. If you hold an older warning, ask your force examinations officer how it treats it.
Common myths about final written warnings
Questions to ask your representative
General information only. Your Federation representative or solicitor can apply these to your case:
- What is the exact date of the severity assessment for this case, and was any warning of mine in force on that date?
- Which version of regulation 42 applies, given when the allegation first came to the force's attention?
- If a final written warning is likely, what can we say about its length, and should we argue for exactly 2 years?
- What mitigation should be disclosed now so it is not given less weight later?
- What date was the warning notified to me, and what expiry date has the force recorded? Have any career breaks been added?
- If I appeal, could the outcome go up as well as down, and what are the exact deadlines?
- What will the vetting review look at, and will any conditions be put on my clearance?
- Will this need to be revealed on an MG6B, and for how long?
- How does force policy treat a live warning for my current role, authorisations, a transfer request or a temporary promotion?
Being told you are facing a final written warning, or living with one, can be a strain. Confidential support is in the police mental health support directory.
What we could not verify
- What counts as "exceptional circumstances". The regulations do not define it and we found no official guidance on it. The College of Policing outcomes guidance we read is the 2022 edition, written before the 2025 change; we could not confirm whether a newer edition exists.
- How long an expired warning is kept. Regulation 15 of the Police Regulations 2003 has expungement rules only for older regimes, and we could not locate the "national retention guidelines" mentioned in the College's vetting guidance.
- A revised severity assessment. The regulations do not say whether revising the assessment under regulation 14(6) changes the date used to decide whether a warning was in force.
- When "notified" happens. The period begins with the day the warning is notified to you. Where an outcome is announced at the end of a hearing and the written report follows later, we found no rule saying which counts; ask the force to confirm your recorded start date.
- Exact expiry dates. Our date examples read "a period of 2 years beginning with the day" as ending at the end of the day before the anniversary. A force could count differently.
- Appeals by chief officers, PCCs and the IOPC. The power to make rules exists from 29 September 2026, but we found no amended tribunal rules bringing it into use.
- Promotion beyond NPPF, temporary promotion, specialist posts, firearms and driving authorities. No national rule tied to a final written warning found; these are force policy. We did not review the College's armed policing guidance for this page.
- Warnings imposed after passing the NPPF exam. The handbook sets eligibility at step one; we found no statement on a warning given between step two and promotion.
- Figures after the 2025 change. No Home Office misconduct statistics covering cases after 28 May 2025 had been published when we checked.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a final written warning in the police?
It is the second least serious of the four disciplinary actions for police officers in the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2020, after a written warning and before reduction in rank and dismissal without notice (regulation 2(1)). It is recorded on your personal record, and while it is live any new misconduct case must go to a misconduct hearing where reduction in rank or dismissal become possible (regulations 23(10)(b) and 42(5)).
How long does a final written warning last in the police?
Two years beginning with the day it is notified to you (regulation 42(9)(b)). If it is given at a misconduct hearing or an accelerated misconduct hearing, the panel can set a longer period of up to 5 years (regulations 42(10) and 62(4)). A final written warning given at a misconduct meeting is always 2 years. Time on a career break does not count (regulations 42(11) and 62(5)).
Can you get a final written warning for gross misconduct?
Only in exceptional circumstances. Since 28 May 2025, where gross misconduct is found at a hearing or accelerated hearing, the outcome must be dismissal without notice unless the panel is satisfied that exceptional circumstances justify a final written warning or reduction in rank (regulations 42(3)(b) and 62(1)). The panel's report must give reasons, and a copy goes to the police and crime commissioner (regulations 43 and 63).
What happens if I get another misconduct finding while a final written warning is live?
If the warning was in force on the date of the severity assessment for the new case, the case must go to a misconduct hearing, not a meeting (regulation 23(10)(b)). Neither a written warning nor a final written warning can then be given (regulation 42(8)), so if misconduct is found the outcome must be reduction in rank or dismissal without notice (regulation 42(3)(a) and (5)). Constables cannot be reduced in rank, so for a constable the only disciplinary action left is dismissal.
Can a final written warning be extended?
Under the 2020 regulations the length is set when the warning is given: 2 years, or at a hearing or accelerated hearing any longer period up to 5 years (regulations 42(10) and 62(4)). We found no power to extend a live warning later as a punishment for new misconduct. That was a feature of the older 2012 regulations, which allowed a one-off 18 month extension in exceptional circumstances.
Can I be promoted with a final written warning?
Not to sergeant or inspector through the National Police Promotion Framework while it is live. The College of Policing's NPPF step two candidate handbook (updated 10 September 2026) says step one eligibility requires no live written warning, final written warning or extended final written warning under the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2020. Other promotion routes are a matter for force policy.
Does a final written warning affect my pay?
Not directly. A final written warning does not change your rank or pay point, and the pay progression standard in Annex F to the Police Regulations 2003 has four conditions (a completed PDR, not being in formal stage 1 or 2 performance or attendance procedures, required training, and managers completing PDRs), none of which is a misconduct outcome.
Does a final written warning affect my vetting?
It triggers a review. For proceedings concluded from 13 July 2026, if you were subject to a misconduct meeting, hearing or accelerated hearing and were not dismissed, the vetting authority must assess whether you may no longer be suitable to hold vetting clearance or whether conditions should change (Police (Vetting) Regulations 2025, regulation 5A(3)). College of Policing guidance says higher-level clearance can be downgraded after such a review.
Can I transfer to another force with a final written warning?
You can apply, but the warning goes with you. Home Office guidance says a live warning transfers with the officer and should be referred to in any reference, and your personal record moves to the new force (Police Regulations 2003, regulation 16). Since 13 July 2026 the receiving force must grant its own vetting clearance before appointing you (Vetting Regulations, regulation 5C).
How do I appeal a final written warning?
If it was given at a misconduct meeting, officers up to chief superintendent appeal internally in writing within 7 working days of receiving the outcome report (regulation 45). If it was given at a misconduct hearing or accelerated hearing, the appeal is to the Police Appeals Tribunal, with notice within 10 working days of first being supplied with the written decision (Police Appeals Tribunals Rules 2020, rule 9). You can appeal the sanction even if you admitted the conduct.
Can an appeal make my warning worse?
After a misconduct meeting it can. The person deciding the appeal may deal with you in any way the meeting could have (regulation 47(1)(b)), and Home Office guidance (paragraph 25.18) says that if the original outcome was too lenient they may increase it up to a final written warning. So appealing a written warning carries a risk of it becoming a final written warning.
What happens when a final written warning expires?
It stops being 'in force', so it no longer forces a later case to a hearing or rules out a written warning. It does not necessarily disappear: panels must have regard to your record of police service (regulation 42(14)(a)), and we found no national rule setting how long an expired 2020-regime warning is kept on file. Retention appears to be a matter of force policy and national retention guidelines.
Sources and how we checked them
Every factual claim on this page was written from the sources below, read on 3 October 2026. Rules and figures change, so check the source for the date you are reading this. Where we could not confirm something from an official or independent source, the page says so rather than guessing. Spotted something out of date? See our corrections policy.
- The Police (Conduct) Regulations 2020 (SI 2020/4), latest revised text, legislation.gov.uk — definition of disciplinary action (reg 2(1)); transitional provision for pre-1 February 2020 allegations (reg 3(2)); severity assessment (reg 14); form of proceedings (reg 23(10)); public hearings and private meetings (reg 39); outcomes, warning periods and career breaks (reg 42); reports and publication (reg 43); meeting appeals (regs 45 to 47); accelerated hearing outcomes and reports (regs 62 and 63) (accessed 3 October 2026)
- Regulation 42 as it stood on 27 May 2025, legislation.gov.uk point-in-time text — the previous rule, under which a final written warning was available for gross misconduct without an exceptional circumstances test (accessed 3 October 2026)
- The Police (Conduct, Performance and Complaints and Misconduct) (Amendment) Regulations 2025 (SI 2025/558), as made — amendments to regulations 42 and 62 (regs 15 and 17), transitional provision for allegations before 28 May 2025 (reg 64), explanatory note (accessed 3 October 2026)
- The Police (Conduct) Regulations 2012 (SI 2012/2632), text as at 31 January 2020 — 12 month and 18 month warning periods (reg 3(3) and (4)); outcomes and the one-off 18 month extension of a final written warning (reg 35) (accessed 3 October 2026)
- Home Office: Conduct, Efficiency and Effectiveness: Statutory Guidance on Professional Standards, Performance and Integrity in Policing (version 1.0, February 2020) — probationers (paras 4.87 to 4.90); warnings on the personal record, transfers and career breaks (paras 10.50 to 10.55 and 11.125 to 11.131); length factors (para 11.127); reduction in rank (para 11.133); appeal meetings may increase an outcome up to a final written warning (para 25.18). Parts of it predate the 2025 amendments (accessed 3 October 2026)
- College of Policing: Guidance on outcomes in police misconduct proceedings (2022 edition, PDF) — available outcomes and warning periods (paras 3.10 to 3.28); the three stages, culpability, harm, aggravating and mitigating factors (paras 4.1 to 4.82); personal mitigation (paras 6.6 to 6.9) (accessed 3 October 2026)
- College of Policing: NPPF step two legal examinations candidate handbook (updated 10 September 2026) — step one eligibility: no live written warning, final written warning or extended final written warning. The College's main site blocked our reader, so we read the same page on the College's own production mirror (accessed 3 October 2026)
- College of Policing: Vetting authorised professional practice (May 2025, PDF) — focused vetting review after misconduct proceedings with any sanction other than dismissal, and downgrading of clearance (paras 7.3.1 to 7.3.6); transferees' misconduct history (paras 7.5.1.d, 7.5.1.h and 7.5.1.i); disclosure for roles in the evidence chain (para 8.6.3) (accessed 3 October 2026)
- The Police (Vetting) Regulations 2025 (SI 2025/502), revised text, legislation.gov.uk — review of clearance after misconduct proceedings (reg 5A(3)); transfers (reg 5C) (accessed 3 October 2026)
- The Police (Conduct and Vetting etc.) (Amendment) Regulations 2026 (SI 2026/653), as made — regulation 5A(3) does not apply where the proceedings concluded before 13 July 2026 (reg 28(4)) (accessed 3 October 2026)
- Crown Prosecution Service: Disclosure Manual, Chapter 18: Revelation and Disclosure of Police Misconduct (refreshed 21 October 2021) — officers reveal relevant misconduct findings on form MG6B; findings about honesty or integrity should always be revealed; PSD advises for how long (accessed 3 October 2026)
- The Police Regulations 2003 (SI 2003/527), regulations 15 and 16, legislation.gov.uk — personal record contents and expungement rules, which refer only to the 1999, 2004 and 2008 conduct regulations; personal record moves on transfer (reg 16) (accessed 3 October 2026)
- Home Office: Annex F to the Police Regulations 2003 (pay), June 2026 version, PDF — the pay progression standard and its four conditions (para 8) (accessed 3 October 2026)
- The Police Appeals Tribunals Rules 2020 (SI 2020/1), revised text, legislation.gov.uk — who may appeal and grounds (rule 4), 10 working day notice (rule 9), late appeals (rule 10) (accessed 3 October 2026)
- Police Act 1996, section 85 and Schedule 6, legislation.gov.uk — tribunal may deal with the officer in any way the original decision-maker could (s 85(2)); power to make rules for appeals by chief officers, PCCs and the IOPC (s 85(1A) to (1C)); effect of orders including dismissal on appeal (Sch 6 para 7(4), inserted by the Crime and Policing Act 2026 s 204, fully in force 29 September 2026); costs (Sch 6 para 9) (accessed 3 October 2026)
- Home Office: Police misconduct, England and Wales: year ending 31 March 2025, bulletin and data tables (ODS) — Tables MP4 and MP5: final written warnings given to police officers by proceeding type and finding (accessed 3 October 2026)
On this topic elsewhere
More in this guide series
Related rights, pay and welfare
Disclaimer
PolicePay.co.uk is an independent reference site. It is not a law firm or a representative body, and this page is general information, not legal advice. Conduct, performance and complaints procedures are set by regulations, statutory guidance and your force's own policies, all of which are amended from time to time, and the outcome of any case turns on its facts. If you are under investigation or facing proceedings, speak to your Police Federation or staff association representative or a solicitor about your own case. Details apply to England and Wales unless stated. Details are as checked on 3 October 2026.