Neil Wilby Media

A North Yorkshire Police (NYP) officer, Traffic Constable (TC) 1288 Nicholas Ham, faces a misconduct hearing on 23rd April 2025 at Police Headquarters in Northallerton.

The force alleges that TC Ham breached Standards of Professional Behaviour by failing to report a road traffic collision transparently, raising questions about honesty, accountability, and lengthy delays in the force’s disciplinary process.

On 31st December 2022, whilst on operational duty, TC Ham was involved in a collision when driving a police vehicle. NYP’s misconduct notice states that the vehicle displayed a warning light indicating possible damage or low tyre pressure, suggesting it might have been unsafe.

Despite this, TC Ham allegedly continued driving on an emergency blue-light response in poor road conditions and failed to report the collision to the control room. Instead, he described the incident as a standard puncture and arranged a call-out repair, bypassing protocols for reporting collisions.

NYP claims these actions violated principles of honesty and integrity. By not disclosing the collision’s severity, TC Ham potentially endangered himself and other road users and undermined operational transparency. The force asserts he knew, or should have known, the vehicle’s condition posed risks, as outlined in the misconduct notice. His deployment as a specialist police driver tends to support that view.

A striking aspect of this case is the lengthy and unexplained gap between the incident and the hearing. For a seemingly straightforward matter involving internal evidence—vehicle logs, control room communications, and repair records—such a delay raises questions. Neil Wilby, a veteran commentator on policing and author of this article, notes: “A 28-month delay in a case like this, with all evidence held internally, suggests inefficiencies that undermine accountability.”

The NYP press office was contacted for comment on the delay and TC Ham’s current duty status but had not responded by the time of publication. The officer was known to be working normally in June 2023, six months after the alleged incident.

The prolonged timeline prompts scrutiny of NYP’s disciplinary processes. Are systemic issues causing similar delays in other cases? Internal reviews typically involve body-worn video, incident reports, and electronic records to ensure thoroughness, but a near-three-year wait for a non-criminal matter risks eroding public confidence and internal morale.

If the disciplinary Panel finds TC Ham breached standards of honesty and transparency, he could face sanctions ranging from a formal reprimand to dismissal. The force has, so far, not named the Panel’s Chair or either of its other two members.

Beyond the outcome, the case highlights broader concerns about the efficiency of NYP’s internal investigations. In an era of heightened scrutiny, not least by Neil Wilby Media, protracted delays may fuel further calls for procedural reform to ensure swift, effective self-regulation.

TC Ham will be given the opportunity to present his account at the hearing, where the Panel will review all the evidence and any legal submissions, including mitigation if appropriate, before reaching their decision. The outcome, and any further insights into NYP’s investigative timelines, will be closely watched by stakeholders and transparency advocates.

Updates will follow the hearing’s conclusion. But the last words in this piece go to nationally-known democracy campaigner, Gwen Swinburn: “Living in York, this is my local force. Opacity comes as standard, it seems, on matters relating to officer misconduct. My repeated questions about former DCC Mabs Hussain‘s ‘moonlight flit’ still go unanswered – and the latest Regulation 43 notice published on the NYP website was completely redacted. The over-burdened precept payer deserves better.”

_____________________________________________________________________________