Chief constable contempt case costs exceed £250,000 so far, reveals force
We can exclusively reveal the amount Northamptonshire Police has paid out for a legal action that saw the chief constable found in contempt of court
By Sarah Ward
Northamptonshire Police has so far paid out more than a quarter of a million pounds dealing with a civil court action brought by a woman who had been fighting the force to reveal video footage of her arrest.
Chief Constable Ivan Balhatchet was the first person in his position ever to be found in contempt of court in November, after high court judges said he had disobeyed court orders to hand over video footage to Nadine Buzzard-Quashie. During earlier court appearances the force had claimed the footage did not exist, but they later confessed to its existence and admitted false statements had been made.
The force was fined £50,000 for the contempt, but NN Journal can now exclusively reveal the cost to the Northamptonshire taxpayer now stands at much higher than that and has totalled £274,382.
The police force said:
“In addition to the fine imposed by the Court of Appeal in November, the Force can confirm it paid costs to the claimant of £24,702.78. In addition, £129,500 has been paid in settlement of the claimant’s pro-bono costs.
“Northamptonshire Police instructed its own counsel for the proceedings and paid those fees in the sum £70,180.”
Ms Buzzard-Quashie, who is an entrepreneur, had fought her case without legal support until last year when she secured pro bono legal aid to help her overturn a county court judgement in 2024 which found against her. The £129,500 has been paid to a legal charity.
The high court judges commended her for her ‘tenacity, resilience and dignity’ and condemned Northamptonshire Police for being ‘wilfully disobedient’ and breaching court orders.
The Northants incident
Londoner Ms Buzzard-Quashie was arrested by Northants Police in August 2021 after driving to the county in a state of distress after an incident with the Metropolitan Police in which she discovered there was graphic CCTV footage of her using a police toilet.
She found herself at Althorp House where she was located by Northamptonshire Police, after her family contacted them concerned about her welfare. After saying she did not want to engage with the officers she then drove away but was followed, with more officers joining her pursuit and a stinger was used to stop her car.
She was wrestled to the ground, handcuffed and arrested for failing to stop. She was then detained in a cell and charged with failing to stop before being taken to a local hospital. She says when the Northamptonshire Police returned her belongings she discovered that the distressing and intrusive Met Police cell video footage was missing. The charges against her were later dropped.
After Northants Police would not give her all the bodyworn camera footage from her arrest, she took the matter to the Information Commissioner’s Officer which ordered the force to make a comprehensive disclosure to her. When this did not happen she took out a civil action against them.
She has ongoing court action against the Northants force and the Metropolitan Police and so the costs to Northamptonshire could still rise significantly higher.
Scrutiny
The case has put pressure on both the chief constable and the Labour police, fire and crime commissioner Danielle Stone.
The chief constable has not faced any sanctions, although the commissioner did say that she had considered suspending him. Balhatchet’s senior officers are now looking at what happened and why, there will be a peer review by another force and the commissioner’s deputy Marianne Kimani is going to undertake a review.
Last month a member of the public and a councillor asked the commissioner at the police and crime panel if she was aware of any further costs and no answer was given.
The chief executive of her office Jonny Bugg, said that was not within her scope of responsibility, but yesterday, ahead of our story, Mr Bugg sent the legal cost details out to the members on the police, fire and crime panel saying ‘the commissioner felt it appropriate to formally brief the panel before these figures are released publicly.’
Yet again NNJ proves its importance to the public of our county. Do get all your friends to read everything this site publishes and, better still, get everyone you know to subscribe. Worth every penny! Who else is going to hold our public servants to account?
The article mentions the ongoing court action brought by Nadine Buzzard-Quashie (NBQ) arising from appalling events which took place in 2021. Her civil case against the Chief Constable of Northamptonshire was commenced in the High Court in December 2024 and the police filed their defence in February 2025. When the Commissioner appeared before the PFCC Panel on 27 November 2025 she claimed that Chief Constable Balhatchet did not know about the matter until 22 October 2025 and herself/her office until about 3-5 November 2025. The matter to which the Commissioner was referring were the county court and the the Court of Appeal cases, particularly it seems the latter. Be that as it may, I think most people would question the accuracy of this assertion of having no knowledge until the dates mentioned. In the unlikely event that this assertion is true it beggars belief that the police and the Office of the Commissioner did not inform the Commissioner and the Chief Constable respectively about the court cases when they were commenced and the proceedings served. Remember the county court and Court of Appeal hearings were concerned with the failure of Northants Police to comply with an order of the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) to hand over material requested by NBQ from Northants Police and her appeal to the Court of Appeal that found Chief Constable Balhatchet was himself guilty of contempt of court.
It is staggering and very questionable that Commissioner Stone did not mention the main High Court proceedings to the PFCC Panel. Did the Panel know on 27 November 2025 of all the cases? Not a word of mention was made by Danielle Stone on 27 November about the existence of the main High Court proceedings. In my view Danielle Stone has been evasive and, as with the Chief Constable, public trust and confidence must be absent. All this with the recent history of the disgraced former Chief Constable now facing criminal proceedings and the conduct of Danielle Stone's predecessor fresh in the public's mind. The public are being treated with utter contempt.
On the matter of the legal costs and out-of-pocket expenses these are set out in the NNJ article but they are going to amount to very much more when the legal costs of the continuing High Court civil action are added. Unless an out-of-court settlement is reached costs awards are always in the discretion of the court. I am sure an award of a seven figure sum will be made or be part of any settlement. Who is going to foot this "bill"? No mention of this by Danielle Stone or her Chief Executive and Monitoring Officer, Jonny Bugg. But even these eye watering figures may pale into relative insignificance when the compensation which will be payable to NBQ is added to the costs figures.
Danielle Stone has many more questions to answer but those good councillors on the PFCC Panel who are seeking the truth (sadly, not all of the Panel it seems) are being frustrated from doing this for incomprehensible and unacceptable reasons. What a rotten and shameful state of affairs.