FOI 716/24 Vapes
Dear Sir/Madam
Enquiry Reference: 716- 24
I write in connection with regards to your Freedom of Information request. Below is your request and our response.
- Between January 2024 and June 2024, how many businesses or individuals in your local area / jurisdiction, have faced legal action (charged/cautioned etc.) for selling vapes (or similar products) to people under the age of 18?
- No information held
This is not a notifiable offence, perhaps better directed to Trading Standards/Licensing rather than the Police?
- Between January 2024 and June 2024, how many times have the police been involved in (attended / charged / investigated etc.) cases of 'spiking' in relation to spiked vapes or similar products?
Clarification:
A 'spiked vape / e-cigarette' is a vape that has been laced with substances such as, but not limited to; vapourised LSD, synthetic marijuana, or painkillers, which can lead to serious health implications. Examples of spiking include; adding substances to a product without the knowledge and/or consent from the victim
The analyst has looked at all crimes validated within the requested timeframe of 01/01/2024 to 30/06/2024. These crimes have been identified to be linked to spiking via vapes by looking at the MO comments for the keywrods of ‘Vape’, ‘E-cig’, ‘Electric Cigarette’ or ‘Spik’ (spik allows for spike or spiking to be picked up). These crimes have then been manually assessed to analyse whether they are related to the request. For example – the possession of a cannabis vape has not been included in this count as it does not have the element of spiking.
Please note care should be taken to understand our return when considering the interpretation or further use of the data as these are not medically confirmed spikings from vapes. These are crimes which the police have recorded that are linked to alleged spiking’s from vapes.
|
Month |
Volume of crimes relating to potential spiking via vape. |
|
Jan |
1 |
|
Mar |
2 |
|
Apr |
3 |
|
May |
1 |
|
Total |
7 |
Please note that all statistical data supplied in relation to Freedom of Information requests is a snapshot of data held at the time the request was received by the Freedom of Information office and is subject to constant change/updates.
The Cleveland Police response to your request is unique and it should be noted that Police Forces do not use generic systems or identical procedures to capture and record data therefore responses from Cleveland Police should not be used as a comparison with any other force response you receive.
If you are not satisfied with this response or any actions taken in dealing with your request, you have the right to request an independent internal review of your case under our review procedure. The Freedom of Information Code of Practice (see below link) states that a request for internal review should be made within 20 working days of the date on this response or 40 working days if extenuating circumstances to account for the delay can be evidenced. Public authorities are not obliged to accept internal reviews after this date.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/freedom-of-information-code-of-practice
Yours sincerely
Information Rights Decision Maker