The majority of complaints made to the Press Complaints Commission, which raise a possible breach of the Code of Practice, are resolved directly between the Commission's staff, editors and complainants.

These are either settled to the express satisfaction of the complainant following some remedial action by the editor or are not pursued by complainants following an explanation or other response from the publication.

Below are summaries of the latest complaints involving the regional press which fall into the first category.

Middlesbrough Evening Gazette
Neil Farthing and Sandra Whitehouse complained that the newspaper had – contrary to their wishes – published a photograph of their son to accompany an article which reported that he had died. (Clause 5)
Resolution: The complaint was resolved when the editor of the newspaper acknowledged that there had been some confusion regarding the publication of the photograph and wrote letters of apology to the complainants.

Bromley Times
Kevin Dodson of Orpington complained that an article written after his brother-in-law's parents – Mr and Mrs Groves – had been found dead in their home misleadingly suggested that Mr Groves had killed his wife, and then taken an overdose after he had been unable to cope with his wife suffering from Alzheimer's disease. The inquest into their deaths established that Mrs Groves had died of 'natural causes' and that Mr Groves had died from alcohol poisoning. (Clause 1)
Resolution: The complaint was resolved when the newspaper published an apology with the following wording to the complainant's family: Mr & Mrs James Groves. An inquest in Croydon found that Mr and Mrs James Groves died on the same day, she from natural causes and he from alcohol poisoning. This is contrary to our story of May 18, which suggested that he might have taken his wife's life and then committed suicide. We apologise to the family for the distress caused by our report.

Hounslow Chronicle
The West Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust complained that an article reporting on the issue of whether the hospital gave support to Satanists had misrepresented the views of Sue Ellen, the chairman of the Trust, who had been quoted in the article. (Clause 1)
Resolution: The complaint was resolved when the newspaper published a letter written by Ms Ellen, making clear that – during her interview with the newspaper – no reference was made to the Satanist incident as the "worst emergency", and comments were not made suggesting that the issue had caused more difficulty than any medical emergency at the hospital.
Further, the letter expressed Ms Ellen's regret that her response to the newspaper's questions had resulted in further press coverage of the issue, which both the Trust Board and the Public and Patient Involvement Forum were keen to see an end to. The letter also set out Ms Ellen's concern that the article had given a distorted view of the Trust's working relationship with the Forum, and contained an apology for any upset the misrepresentation of her views might have caused to Forum members. Although the Trust accepted the publication of the letter as a resolution to its complaint, it expressed its hope that the newspaper would provide more balanced coverage on issues relating to the hospital in the future.

The Sentinel
Karen le Doux of Staffordshire complained that the newspaper had declined to publish a letter she had submitted in response to claims in another reader's letter regarding an attack in which her son was involved. (Clause 1)
Resolution: The newspaper indicated that correspondence on the subject within the letters page of the newspaper was now closed. However, the complaint was resolved on the basis of a statement published on the PCC website which made her position on the following points clear: that her son's intention was to defend his young cousin; that the police found no evidence of 'happy slapping' in the attack; and that, although a group of young people crowded around the incident, this did not automatically make them acquaintances of her son.

News Shopper
D. Ramkin of Kent complained that the newspaper had published a letter from an anonymous reader in response to his published letter on the subject of obesity. He felt the letter in response was a personal attack on him and had caused a great deal of distress. (Clause 3)
Resolution: The newspaper assured the complainant that its intention was not to publish any letter that would cause him discomfort or distress. The complaint was resolved when the editor apologised if the published response had upset him and offered to write to him privately to this effect.

Barking and Dagenham Post
Anthony Richards of Barking complained that the newspaper had amended correspondence between him and the Trading Standards Department to suggest that he had submitted a reader's letter for publication. (Clause 1)
Resolution: The complaint was resolved when the newspaper agreed to publish a clarification with the following wording: On 23 August, we published a letter from Anthony Richards of Wilmington Gardens, Barking on the topic of clothing collections. In fact, this was a letter written by Mr Richards to the Trading Standards Department of Barking and Dagenham Council, rather than submitted for publication as a reader's letter. We apologise for any misunderstanding.

The Scotsman
James A Mackie complained that an article was inaccurate when it stated that he was to send a letter to members of the Scottish Conservative Party asking that all Conservative MSPs be deselected. (Clauses 1, 3)
Resolution: The complaint was resolved when the newspaper published the following clarification: In an article published on August 28 under the headline ‘Rebels urge party members to oust all Tory MSPs at Holyrood elections’ it was stated that a letter written by Jim Mackie, a Tory candidate for Ochil, called on party members to deselect all Conservative MSPs. Mr Mackie has asked us to point out that the letter in question was not written by him, but by his campaign manager, and forwarded to him for his comments. Mr Mackie has further asked us to point out that the draft letter was never sent out and that he did not authorise its circulation. We hope this clarifies matters and regret any misunderstanding.

Holderness Gazette
James Wilson of Hull complained that a letter he had submitted for publication had been so edited as to change its meaning. (Clause 1)
Resolution: The matter was resolved when the newspaper republished the first part of the complainant's letter (the part which had previously appeared in an edited form) along with an editor's note clarifying the earlier error.