Most recorded stop and searches end with no further action taken. Across the 37 forces publishing usable data the figure is 70.8%. That is the backdrop against which any single search has to be judged, and it is not the same thing as saying any single search was unlawful.
What makes a search lawful
The most commonly used power, section 1 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, requires the officer to have reasonable grounds to suspect that they will find stolen or prohibited articles.
"This section does not give a constable power to search a person or vehicle or anything in or on a vehicle unless he has reasonable grounds for suspecting that he will find stolen or prohibited articles."
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, section 1(3)PACE Code A is explicit that reasonable grounds can never be based on personal factors alone: not on race, age, appearance, or a previous conviction, and not on generalisations or stereotypes about who is more likely to be involved in crime.
Before searching, the officer must tell you who they are, which station they are from, what they are looking for, and the grounds for the search. A failure to give that information can itself make the search unlawful.
A section 60 search under the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 works differently: it needs no individual suspicion, but it must be authorised in advance by a senior officer for a defined area and period. Outside that authorisation the power does not exist.
What the national picture shows
Across the 37 forces that publish usable outcome data, 70.8% of recorded stop and searches ended in no further action. That figure is the average across forces, and it varies widely between them.
It is important to be precise about what this does and does not show. A search that finds nothing was not necessarily unlawful: reasonable grounds can be present and the suspicion simply wrong. The figure is context, not proof. What it does establish is that a search ending in nothing is the normal outcome rather than an aberration, which is worth knowing if you were told your search was routine.
See the no-further-action rate for your own force.
What has to be shown
An unlawful search is a trespass to the person, actionable without proof of loss. The argument usually turns on whether the grounds recorded at the time were genuine and objectively reasonable, whether the required information was given, and whether the search went further than the power allowed. The removal of more than an outer coat, jacket and gloves in public is separately constrained by Code A.
How long you have to bring a claim
Publishing a general figure here would be worse than publishing nothing, because a reader who relies on the wrong one loses their claim outright. Get your own position checked, and do it early rather than late.
The free routes, before any claim
A complaint to the force costs nothing and does not stop you claiming later. If the force's answer does not stand up you can apply for a review, and across all forces reporting, 24.5% of completed reviews found the force's own outcome was not reasonable and proportionate.
The three routes, and what each one gets you.
Start with your force
Complaint handling, review outcomes and stop and search practice vary enormously between forces. Every force has its own page here with its own figures.