Nearly Half of Electronic Offender Tags Fitted Late, Putting Victims at Risk, Watchdog Warns

A new inspection report has found that almost half of the electronic tags used to monitor offenders in England and Wales are not being fitted on schedule, with delays that watchdog officials say are placing victims in serious danger.

The review, published by His Majesty's Inspectorate of Probation (HMIP), reveals that only 55% of GPS and radio frequency tags were installed within the required timeframe, while 60% of alcohol monitoring tags were fitted promptly. The figures point to a systemic failure in a programme that is central to the government's strategy for managing offenders in the community.

According to the report's findings, some offenders waited as long as five months to be tagged after the date they should have been fitted. In other cases, delays stretched beyond two weeks, and one in 10 people experienced waits of five months. These delays have led to repeated breaches of court and prison orders, undermining the very purpose of the monitoring scheme.

Electronic monitoring is used by the Probation Service to track curfews and enforce conditions attached to court or prison orders. As of June 2026, a total of 27,847 people in England and Wales had been given tagging orders with equipment. The technology is intended to support punishment, manage risk, safeguard the public and protect victims.

Martin Jones CBE, HM Chief Inspector of Probation, cautioned that the technology alone cannot guarantee safety. "There is a real danger that electronic monitoring creates a false sense of assurance if the technology is not matched by effective professional practice," he said. He added that expanding tagging programmes without addressing their weaknesses risks "overpromising and underdelivering on public protection."

The report also identified a range of reasons why tags were not fitted on time, including instances where individuals failed to make themselves available for fitting. However, inspectors made clear that the consequences of these delays are felt far beyond administrative inconvenience.

Victims' Commissioner Claire Waxman OBE said victims must be informed "immediately" if tagging is delayed, because otherwise they could be left with a "false sense of security." She called for a "robust response" when breaches occur, but warned there are "real concerns" about how "overstretched" probation services would manage that added pressure.

Beyond the issue of late fittings, the inspection uncovered significant problems with how the data generated by tags is used. Information from the devices was often found to be underused, with major violations raised and explored in just 46% of relevant cases. Inspectors also discovered little evidence that electronic monitoring was being used consistently to promote behaviour change among offenders.

There are three main types of tags in operation: curfew tags, location tags and alcohol tags. Each is designed to impose strict controls as part of an offender's punishment while helping to manage risk, safeguarding and victim protection. Offenders who breach their orders can be returned immediately to prison, given a court order or issued a formal warning.

The findings come at a sensitive moment for the criminal justice system. Plans to significantly expand electronic monitoring were announced earlier this year as part of the Sentencing Act 2026, which aims to ease pressure on prisons by managing more offenders in the community. Under the new law, thousands more prisoners will be released early from October, and most of them will require tagging.

A Ministry of Justice spokesperson defended the government's record, saying public protection was its priority. "That's why we are delivering the biggest expansion of tagging in British history, backed by £100 million in funding, with tag install rates up by nearly 50% since 2024," the spokesperson said. They added that the investment formed part of a record £700 million commitment to probation and community services, with 2,300 trainee officers recruited over the last two years and a further 1,300 planned this year.

The spokesperson said these measures would ensure "dangerous offenders are kept under closer surveillance than ever before." However, the inspection report suggests that the current pace of expansion may be outpacing the system's ability to deliver reliable monitoring on the ground.

The report's conclusions raise difficult questions about the balance between reducing prison numbers and maintaining effective public protection. While tagging is widely viewed as a cheaper and less restrictive alternative to custody, its value depends on timely installation, consistent monitoring and swift action when conditions are broken. The inspection suggests that in a substantial number of cases, those conditions are not being met.

For victims, the implications are particularly serious. If an offender is not tagged when expected, the safeguards they were promised may not exist in practice. Campaigners argue that delays erode trust in the justice system and leave people who have already suffered harm feeling exposed and unsupported.

The HMIP report adds to a growing body of evidence that the expansion of community-based punishment must be matched by investment in the staff, systems and oversight needed to make it work. Without those improvements, inspectors warn, the promise of enhanced public protection through tagging could prove hollow.

The Ministry of Justice has insisted it is committed to learning from the findings and continuing its recruitment and funding drive. But with early releases set to increase demand for tags in the coming months, the pressure on probation services is only likely to grow. Whether the system can close the gap between policy ambition and frontline delivery remains an open and urgent question.