A FARNHAM couple have waged an 11-month battle with Surrey Police, of whom they are still waiting for a personal visit after an urgent 999 call. Last August, a bloodied man entered their rear garden and forced his way into the home of Jean and Rod Aistrop, with no police officer visiting their house on the day - or since The couple, of Upper Hale, believe the police have shirked their duty of protecting the public, and have escalated their complaint to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC). Their quest for answers began after an unusual Saturday afternoon on August 19, 2006. "My wife, myself and my son were resting in the back garden when suddenly, without warning, a young man climbed over four or five adjacent properties. He was in desperation, and had blood pouring from his head," said Mr Aistrop. "Immediately, he rushed into our house and shouted at my wife to lock the door, saying: 'they are out to get me, they are going to kill me'." The man, who had been Tarmacing at nearby Alma Road, was confronted by a gang of young men - one of whom wielded an iron bar - and fled for sanctuary, ending up within the Aistrop's property. After phoning the emergency services, requesting both police and ambulance, Mrs Aistrop made her terror known to the operator. "I was extremely shaken by the situation," said Mrs Aistrop. "A stranger forced his way into my house and I felt under threat by both him and the gang of five men who were after him. "I was assured by the emergency services operator that the police and ambulance were on their way with blue lights. "During our phone conversation, the brother of the man arrived and told him that the attackers were going to 'do the whole family'. At this point we had two strange men in our house and felt increasingly under threat from the attackers," she added. Fifteen minutes after the Aistrop's initial call, an ambulance arrived and took the injured man and his brother to Frimley Park Hospital. Police claim that two police cars were sent to the scene of the crime, but not to the Aistrop's home - much to their anger. "At no point that day, or on any day since, have we had any visit or call from the police, which I find astonishing and disappointing. "It was made patently clear to the emergency services operator that I felt there was a serious threat to my family and myself, from both the stranger in my home and the gang that was after him. "I was reassured on more than one occasion by police emergency staff that police car was on the way to my home. I have always had the utmost trust and confidence in the police force of this country to protect the population, but I feel in this case that we have been failed. My family felt extremely vulnerable." The Aistrop's subsequently wrote three complaint letters to Surrey Police, and receiving three replies - one of which admitted an "error in communication" resulting in "a poor service," according to a Surrey Police Inspector. But the couple are increasingly frustrated at the "confusion" and a "very cursory investigation", which demonstrate "a serious failure in police procedures, which in other circumstances could have resulted in injury or death". "Normally this is an exceedingly quiet place, and we were very disappointed by the lack of police presence, despite two separate instances when we were assured that the police were on the way here," said Mr Aistrop. "After three weeks we figured that as far as Surrey Police were concerned, the incident was forgotten. But we thought that this wasn't acceptable. It was an incident which involved violence," he added. Subsequently, the Aistrop's escalated their complaint to the IPCC, and remain determined to get answers. Of their 11-month battle, Mr Aistrop continued: "At the time of the incident, we thought it was going to be quickly resolved. We thought it was just a matter of meeting with a police representative. "But at a management level, they did not understand how their procedures had failed. Since this was the case, there was no prospect, other than random chance, of them being able to correct their procedures, meaning that the public remain at risk. "This required us to pursue the matter, which we have done, and will continue to do so," he added. Surrey Police did not provide a comment before the time The Herald went to press.