Before you read: these examples are fictional

Both case entries below are invented for training. No real client, officer, station or case is described, and any resemblance is coincidental. Never copy them into a portfolio: assessors want your own cases, your own decisions and your own reflection.

This post is the worked-example companion to the process guides at /guides/psras-portfolio-and-workbook and /guides/psras-workbook-sign-off, and to /blog/psr-portfolio-while-employed. If you want the route into the work rather than the write-up, Police Station Rep UK covers it at policestationrepuk.org/buildportfolioguide.

What the portfolio must evidence

The rules come from the SRA's PSRAS assessment guidelines (Annex 2), which the assessment organisations apply. Paraphrasing them closely: the portfolio has two parts completed in three stages, in chronological order (para 5.2).

Each case must involve a different client (co-defendants do not count as separate clients; the same client may appear at most twice, on different issues), and each case must involve a formal police interview of the suspect at a police station. A case may include a video identification procedure but must not be limited to it (para 5.7). Client names must not appear in the case reports (para 5.8). Each report is identified by the CDS Unique File Number, or in a non-legal aid case by a firm reference or custody number (para 5.9).

The assessment criteria (para 6.1) are the real structure of a good entry. Each case report must cover: case description; obtaining information; assessment of information and advice to the client; dealing with the police and third parties and making representations; professional ethics; and feedback and reflection. The guidelines say these are not prescribed headings (other than case description), but writing to them makes it hard to leave anything out.

Part A, Stage 1: two cases in which you observe a solicitor advising a client at the police station. Indictable-only and duty solicitor cases may be used here.
Part A, Stage 2: two cases in which you advise while observed by your supervising solicitor, with written feedback from the supervisor. No indictable-only or duty solicitor cases, and a supervisor interjection makes the case unacceptable.
Part B, Stage 3: five cases in which you advise without the supervising solicitor present, as a probationary representative. No indictable-only or duty solicitor cases, and no case that pre-dates your LAA registration (para 5.8).
Age limits: Part A cases no older than three months when submitted for technical checking; Part B cases no older than 12 months when submitted for assessment (para 5.4).

Example 1 (fictional): voluntary interview at a police station, Part B

Case description. 'UFN [anonymised]. Client A, 34, attended a police station by appointment for a voluntary interview under caution about an alleged theft of tools from a building site where he had worked. I attended alone as a probationary representative. After disclosure and consultation the client answered questions. Outcome: released while enquiries continued.'

Annotation: short, factual, and it tells the assessor what you had to do. The case qualifies because it is a formal interview at a police station; it is not indictable-only and not a duty case.

Obtaining information. 'From the interviewing officer I obtained the allegation, the date range, a summary of the site manager's statement and the fact that CCTV had been requested but not viewed. I asked whether the client had been identified by name or by description, whether anything had been recovered and whether any other suspect was being investigated. I confirmed the client was attending voluntarily and could leave (Code C 3.21). From the client I took his account, his employment history at the site and whether he had keys.'

Annotation: list the questions you asked and the answers, not just 'I obtained disclosure'. Code C 11.1A requires the suspect to be given sufficient information to understand the nature of the suspected offence before interview; show that you tested what was given against that standard.

Assessment and advice. 'Disclosure was limited and the CCTV had not been viewed. The client gave a clear, consistent account that he had returned his keys before the date range and that other workers had access. I weighed the risk of a later inference under CJPOA s.34 if he relied at trial on facts he did not mention, against the risk of committing to detail before the CCTV was seen. Because his account was simple, consistent with documents he could name and unlikely to be undermined by footage of the site, I advised him to answer questions. I explained the caution in plain words and that the choice was his.'

Annotation: this is the section assessors weight most. Show the options you considered, the reasons, and the client's informed decision. Avoid 'I advised no comment as disclosure was limited' with no analysis.

Dealing with the police and representations. 'I asked the officer to note that the CCTV had not been viewed, and asked that the client be told the outcome of the CCTV review. I intervened once when a question assumed he still held keys, asking the officer to put the question neutrally.'

Professional ethics. 'Before advising I checked for conflicts: no other suspect was a client of the firm. The client asked me to say he had never been to the site after leaving; as that would have contradicted his own account to me, I explained I could not put forward a version I knew to be untrue, and he chose to give his account as he had told it to me.'

Feedback and reflection. 'My supervisor said my disclosure note was thorough but that I should have asked whether the site manager's statement named him. Next time I will ask expressly how the client was linked to the offence before advising.'

Example 2 (fictional): 17-year-old in custody with an appropriate adult, Part B

Case description. 'Client B, 17, arrested for criminal damage to a bus shelter. His mother attended as appropriate adult. I attended in person. Following consultation he gave a prepared statement and declined further questions. Outcome: released under investigation.'

Obtaining information. 'From the custody record I noted the time of arrival, the reason for arrest and that the custody officer had identified him as a juvenile (Code C 1.5). I checked that the appropriate adult had been told why she was there (Code C 3.17). From the officer I obtained a summary of an eyewitness account and that the damage was caught on a council camera not yet downloaded.'

Annotation: for a juvenile, the custody record is part of the information. Show you checked the AA had been called and was suitable. Under Code C Note 1B, a parent should not be the AA if she is suspected of involvement, is the victim, a witness or involved in the investigation, or has received admissions before acting as AA.

Assessment and advice. 'I consulted with the client privately; the AA agreed to wait outside. I explained to both that the AA is not covered by legal privilege (Code C Note 1E). The client said he was present but did not cause the damage. Given that the footage had not been viewed and the eyewitness description was general, I advised a prepared statement setting out that he was present and did not damage the shelter, and to decline further questions. I explained the risk of a s.34 inference if he later relied on facts not in the statement.'

Dealing with the police and third parties. 'Before interview I explained to the AA her role under Code C 11.17: not simply an observer, but there to advise the client, observe whether the interview is conducted properly and help communication. During the interview the officer asked a long compound question; I asked for it to be broken down.'

Professional ethics. 'The mother asked me afterwards what her son had told me. I explained I could not share what he had said in private without his agreement.'

Feedback and reflection. 'My supervisor said the prepared statement was well focused but asked whether I had considered his age and maturity when explaining the s.34 risk. I will check understanding by asking the client to explain the advice back in his own words.'

How to reflect without over-writing

The criteria ask you to show you received feedback, reflected on it and considered training needs where appropriate. That is three things, not three pages. A good reflection names one specific thing that went well, one specific thing you would change, and what you will do differently next time. 'I learned a lot' and 'I felt confident' tell the assessor nothing.

Tie reflection to a decision point in the case: the disclosure you missed, the moment you could have intervened, the way you explained an inference. If your supervisor's feedback and your reflection say the same thing in the same words, you have not reflected.

Reasons entries and portfolios fail, from the guidelines

The SRA guidelines state certain conditions which, if not met, mean the portfolio must fail (para 5.9), and other rules about which cases can be used. These are the ones to check line by line:

Cases not in chronological order (except in a resubmitted portfolio), any part not completed, or the portfolio not signed by both you and your supervising solicitor (para 5.9).
A supervisor interjecting during a Stage 2 observed case (para 5.2).
Indictable-only or duty solicitor cases used in Stage 2 or Part B (paras 5.2, 5.8).
Part B cases that pre-date your LAA registration, or cases outside the age limits in para 5.4.
Repeated clients beyond the limit, co-defendants counted as separate clients, or a case without a formal police station interview (para 5.7).
Client names in the reports (para 5.8).
On resubmission, a failed report cannot be reworked: you need a new case for each failed report (para 10.2).

Supervisor sign-off: what to check before submitting

Every report has a UFN (or firm reference/custody number in a non-legal aid case) and no client names.
The stages are in order and each case meets its stage's rules.
Stage 2 cases have the supervisor's written feedback attached.
Each report covers all six criteria in para 6.1.
Dates are inside the para 5.4 limits on the day you submit, not the day you wrote it up.
The format matches your assessment organisation's own guidance (para 5.10) and any prescribed certification is included (para 6.1).
Both signatures are on the portfolio.

Next steps: CIT and the written test

Under the Police Station Register Arrangements 2025, you register as a probationary representative after passing the written test (unless exempt) and having Part A certified, and you then complete Part B and the Critical Incidents Test. Check the Arrangements for the deadlines that apply to you: missing them can lead to suspension from the register. The CIT can only be taken once you are registered.

For the CIT, see /guides/critical-incidents-test-psras and /blog/how-to-pass-critical-incidents-test. When a set like this feels easy, try the wider PSR Train question bank. Create a free account at https://psrtrain.com/signup and work through timed practice by topic.

Sources: SRA, Police Station Representatives Accreditation Scheme assessment guidelines (Annex 2); LAA, Police Station Register Arrangements 2025; PACE Code C 2023 (gov.uk).

Disclaimer. PSR Train is independent exam-prep for PSRAS candidates in England and Wales. It is not the SRA, the LAA or an assessment organisation (Cardiff or Datalaw). These are original training items, not past papers. Check every point against the current PACE Codes, the legislation and your assessment organisation's materials. This is general training information, not legal advice, and it does not replace your firm's supervision.