Following the imposition of orders that restrict an offender from a particular address, receiver equipment can be placed at that location so that both the inhabitant and the authorities can be alerted if there is a breach.

However, tagging companies were not previously required to inform the person at the restricted address if they were unable to fit the electronic device, for whatever reason.

Ms Angiolini responded by undertaking a review and has since altered the procedure, allowing the individual to be informed at the same time as the court.

“As a result of your letter, these procedures have been reviewed and in future the person staying at a ‘restriction away from’ address will be informed by the electronic monitoring company of a failure to tag the offender at the same time the sentencing court is advised of the breach,” the Solicitor General told Ms Maclean.

Ms Maclean, who was alerted to the situation by one of her constituents, praised the decision.

“The system of providing a receiver to someone staying in a house from which a tagged offender has been restricted is a good way of both ensuring that person’s peace of mind, and also alerting the authorities if any breach of the restriction of liberty order does occur,” she said.

“However, it is essential that if the offender cannot be tagged, the person staying at the restricted address must be informed, so that they are aware they cannot rely on the receiver to alert them to the presence of the offender.

“It is extremely important to ensure that vulnerable people do not fall into a false sense of security, which could potentially put them at risk.”