Resolution Statement – 03497-25 Lloyd v Shropshire Star

Summary of Complaint

1. Bradley Lloyd complained to the Independent Press Standards Organisation that Shropshire Star breached Clause 1 (Accuracy), Clause 2 (Privacy) and Clause 12 (Discrimination) of the Editors’ Code of Practice in an article headlined “Woman admits bank card theft”, published on 28 August 2025.

2. The article – which appeared on page five - was a roundup of local court cases. It said the complainant had “admitted destroying a woman's mobile phone and an extractor fan at her home. Bradley Lloyd, aged 31, damaged the iPhone worth £425 and fan worth £108 in Wem on April 24 last year.” The article further included the complainant’s street-level address and said he “pleaded guilty at Tolford Magistrates Court to two counts of criminal damage.”

3. The article also appeared online in substantially the same format under the headline “Man, 31, admits damaging woman’s property in Wem including £425 iPhone”.

4. The complainant said that the article was inaccurate in breach of Clause 1 as he said he had not pleaded guilty to either charge. The complainant said he was found guilty, however, he planned to appeal the finding. He further said that the extractor fan referenced in the article was in his home, not the victim’s.

5. The complainant also said the article breached Clause 2 as he was not contacted prior to its publication. said he said this was an infringement of his privacy. He said there should have been a reporting restriction, preventing his case from being reported on. He further said that the article had published his address, in breach of Clause 2.

6. The complainant also said the article breached Clause 12, as the headline included his gender identity and age in conjunction with the victim’s female gender identify. He said this gave the impression he was more threatening.

7. The newspaper removed the article while it investigated the complainant’s concerns. In response to the concerns raised under Clause 1, it said it relied on information provided by the court register. It accepted that the complainant had not pleaded guilty as stated in the article, however it said he was convicted of the charges. It said it would be happy to publish a correction to correct the plea and location of the extractor fan.

8. Regarding Clause 2, the publication said any restriction on reporting on what is heard court was a matter for the court to impose, and it was free to report on matters heard in open court. In regard to Clause 12, it said the headline was intended to be purely factual. It said it had no agenda to make the complainant sound more threatening.

9. The complainant requested the newspaper not publish anything additional, unless it was a public apology.

10. The publication said it was happy to send him a letter of apology regarding his plea.

11. On 12 September the newspaper sent the complainant an email apologising for reporting that he pleaded guilty.

12. The complainant did not consider this sufficient to resolve the complaint.

Relevant Clause Provisions

Clause 1 (Accuracy)

i) The Press must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information or images, including headlines not supported by the text.

ii) A significant inaccuracy, misleading statement or distortion must be corrected, promptly and with due prominence, and — where appropriate — an apology published. In cases involving IPSO, due prominence should be as required by the regulator.

iii) A fair opportunity to reply to significant inaccuracies should be given, when reasonably called for.

iv) The Press, while free to editorialise and campaign, must distinguish clearly between comment, conjecture and fact.

Clause 2 (Privacy)*

i) Everyone is entitled to respect for their private and family life, home, physical and mental health, and correspondence, including digital communications.

ii) Editors will be expected to justify intrusions into any individual's private life without consent. In considering an individual's reasonable expectation of privacy, account will be taken of the complainant's own public disclosures of information and the extent to which the material complained about is already in the public domain or will become so.

iii) It is unacceptable to photograph individuals, without their consent, in public or private places where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy.

Clause 12 (Discrimination)

i) The press must avoid prejudicial or pejorative reference to an individual's, race, colour, religion, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation or to any physical or mental illness or disability.

ii) Details of an individual's race, colour, religion, gender identity, sexual orientation, physical or mental illness or disability must be avoided unless genuinely relevant to the story.

Mediated Outcome

13. The complaint was not resolved through direct correspondence between the parties. IPSO therefore began an investigation into the matter.

14. During IPSO’s investigation the publication offered to print the following correction:

“We have been asked to make clear that Bradley Lloyd, 31, of [address] was found guilty of criminal damage to a mobile phone and extractor fan after a trial at Telford Magistrates Court and that he did not plead guilty. We are happy to clarify the matter.”

15. The complainant said he did not want a published correction. He said a private apology letter would resolve the matter to his satisfaction.

16. The newspaper agreed to resolve the complaint on this basis.

17. As the complaint was successfully mediated, the Complaints Committee did not make a determination as to whether there had been any breach of the Code.

Date complaint received: 28/08/2025

Date complaint concluded by IPSO: 11/11/2025