Recurring concern

Inaccurate calculation of prisoners’ release and sentence dates

First to latest report 20 Jul 2015 — 2 Jun 2021

Reports that mention this concern
3
Times this concern has been raised
4
Stated actions linked to this concern
5

What this concern includes

Includes failures in calculating, checking, recording or making available prisoners’ legally applicable sentence, release or parole dates when the failure can cause unlawful detention, delayed release or other unsafe custody decisions.

What is not included
  • Excludes general release planning, accommodation, notification or supervision failures where sentence or release-date calculation is not the deficient control.
  • Excludes generic prison record-keeping or key-date alerting failures unless they directly affect the accuracy or availability of sentence or release-date calculations.
  • Excludes legal disputes about sentence interpretation where the calculation process is accurate and the issue is only disagreement with the applicable law.
  • Excludes downstream detention or release decisions after the relevant sentence and release dates have been accurately calculated and made available.

Reports and published responses 3 reports

See individual reports that have raised this concern, and the actions taken in response

  1. Milton Keynes

    AI-generated summary

    Mark Samuel CULVERHOUSE · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Mark Samuel Culverhouse died in hospital on 24 April 2019 after being found with a ligature around his neck in a segregation cell at HMP Woodhill. The inquest jury concluded that he died from suicide, and that his unlawful detention and the decision to place him in segregation contributed to his death. The report identified concerns about the failure to calculate his release date before his recall and detention.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to calculate prisoners’ release dates before recall decisions

    Wider context from the report

    “During the course of the inquest into the death of Mark Culverhouse it became apparent, and indeed was accepted that his detention at HMP Woodhill from the 18th of April 2019 until the 23rd of April 2019 was unlawful. He had been recalled under the terms of his license having been released from Peterborough prison on the 12th of April 2019. The calculation of his release date was not conducted by the offender management unit at the prison until the 23rd of April 2019, after the extended Easter bank holiday. I was told that there was no process in place whereby a prisoner’s release is calculated until such time as they come back into custody. The prison and probation ombudsman brought this matter to the attention of the prison service recommending that the release date calculation should take place within one working day of the prisoner arriving in prison. I cannot see how that can be acceptable particularly where, in Mr Culverhouse’s case, it would have made no difference because of the bank holiday. I consider that there was a clear link between his unlawful detention and his eventual death on the 24th of April 2019 and, in order to prevent similar deaths in the future, I believe an urgent review is required and the system changed to ensure that the calculation of the release date is made prior to the decision to recall being taken. This will avoid the possibility of anyone being unlawfully imprisoned in this country under similar circumstances. ”

    Source location

    Mark Samuel CULVERHOUSE · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Add a NOMIS alert flag to identify prisoners whose unspent remand time may shorten custody or result in immediate release.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In this particular case, following the recommendation made by the Prisons and Probation Ombudsman (PPO), work was carried out to add an alert flag to the National Offender Management Information System (NOMIS) to warn staff when there is unspent remand time on a prisoner’s record which may cause a reduction in the time a prisoner should spend in custody or which may give rise to an immediate release. Sentence calculation is carried out as a priority in these circumstances.”

    Source location

    2021-0189-Response-from-HMPPS_Published
    Page 2 · response
    Published 4 June 2021

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Prioritize sentence calculation when NOMIS identifies unspent remand time that may affect custody duration or immediate release.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In this particular case, following the recommendation made by the Prisons and Probation Ombudsman (PPO), work was carried out to add an alert flag to the National Offender Management Information System (NOMIS) to warn staff when there is unspent remand time on a prisoner’s record which may cause a reduction in the time a prisoner should spend in custody or which may give rise to an immediate release. Sentence calculation is carried out as a priority in these circumstances.”

    Source location

    2021-0189-Response-from-HMPPS_Published
    Page 2 · response
    Published 4 June 2021

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Issue further communication to all staff on using NOMIS alerts and confirming recalled prisoners’ release dates as soon as possible.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In response to your concerns, the sentence calculation policy team will be issuing further communication to all staff about the importance of using the alerts on NOMIS to flag prisoners with unspent remand time in order to reduce the risk of prisoners being detained longer than required and to confirm release dates to recalled prisoners as soon as possible.”

    Source location

    2021-0189-Response-from-HMPPS_Published
    Page 2 · response
    Published 4 June 2021

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Pre-recall release-date calculations cannot be undertaken by untrained staff because only trained staff calculate sentences during office hours.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “After careful consideration, we must advise that we do not consider it possible to comply with the recommendation for the following reasons:”

    Source location

    2021-0189-Response-from-HMPPS_Published
    Page 1 · response
    Published 4 June 2021

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Accurate release dates cannot be calculated before recall because the sentence balance and applicable recall type remain unresolved.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “After careful consideration, we must advise that we do not consider it possible to comply with the recommendation for the following reasons:”

    Source location

    2021-0189-Response-from-HMPPS_Published
    Page 1 · response
    Published 4 June 2021

    Open published response

  2. East Sussex

    AI-generated summary

    Dean Louis BARRELL · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Dean Barrell was found hanging in his cell at HMP Lewes on 13 February 2017, and the jury concluded that he had died by suicide. He had not been informed that he was due for release on 17 February 2017 and believed he would remain in prison until 29 April 2017. The report identified a seven-day delay in communicating his actual release date as a principal concern, particularly given the vulnerability of prisoners and the potential impact on his death.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Delay in communicating actual release dates to custodial establishments

    Wider context from the report

    “Dean Barrell clearly thought he was in HMP Lewes for the remainder of his sentence (some 3 months). This was incorrect, as he was due for release on 17 February 2017. Had Mr Barrell been informed sooner and in a timely fashion, he may well have not taken his own life. It took the Prison and Probation Service 7 days to communicate the actual release date to HMP Lewes. HMP Lewes attempted then to communicate this within 3 hours of receipt, but Mr Barrell had by then taken his own life. Fixed term recalls for breach of licence conditions are not complex. By their very nature, they can result in short sentences to be served. Vulnerable prisoners deserve to know what their actual release date is, as soon as possible. A seven day delay as in this case, is simply unacceptable. The communication of the actual release date to a prisoner should, in this technological age, take less than 7 days. ”

    Source location

    Dean Louis BARRELL · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 1 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Publish a new recall policy framework retaining the notification requirement and revising the timeframe to one working day.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “This Probation Instruction remains in force; however a new policy framework covering recall actions will be published by the end of 2018. This framework retains the above requirement but, for the sake of clarity, revises the timeframe to one working day.”

    Source location

    Dean-BARRELL-Response
    Page 2 · response
    Published 11 October 2018

    Open published response

  3. Liverpool and the Wirral

    AI-generated summary

    Luke Myers · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Luke Myers was found hanging from a bunk-bed in his prison cell on 4 February 2013 and was pronounced dead after resuscitation attempts were unsuccessful. The report raised concerns about the miscalculation of his sentence, which the inquest jury found was a likely factor in his death, and about the length of time since prison discipline staff had received first-aid training.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to provide timely clarification of prisoners’ sentence lengths

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) HMP Liverpool miscalculated Luke Myer's extended sentence of 12 years from November 2012 by erroneously applying Section 226A CJA 2003 and with regard to parole section 246A CJA 2003. The sentence was under section 227 CJA 2003 – Are there any other prisoners sentenced at that transitional time who believe they have a longer sentence than the law prescribed? Luke Myers tried to clarify his length of sentence during his life and it was only clarified during his inquest. The jury found this was a likely factor in his death. ”

    Source location

    Luke Myers · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to accurately calculate prisoners’ sentences under the applicable statutory provisions

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) HMP Liverpool miscalculated Luke Myer's extended sentence of 12 years from November 2012 by erroneously applying Section 226A CJA 2003 and with regard to parole section 246A CJA 2003. The sentence was under section 227 CJA 2003 – Are there any other prisoners sentenced at that transitional time who believe they have a longer sentence than the law prescribed? Luke Myers tried to clarify his length of sentence during his life and it was only clarified during his inquest. The jury found this was a likely factor in his death. ”

    Source location

    Luke Myers · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Review sentence calculations for the current prisoner population to identify miscalculated sentences.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Staff at HMP Liverpool miscalculated Luke Myer’s extended sentence and may have done so in other cases I can confirm that staff in the Offender Management Unit at HMP Liverpool have reviewed the sentence calculations for the current population and found no other prisoners to have a miscalculated sentence.”

    Source location

    2015-0292-Response-by-Ministry-of-Justice
    Page 1 · response
    Published 20 July 2015

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    No other prisoners were found to have miscalculated sentences after reviewing current population sentence calculations.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Staff at HMP Liverpool miscalculated Luke Myer’s extended sentence and may have done so in other cases I can confirm that staff in the Offender Management Unit at HMP Liverpool have reviewed the sentence calculations for the current population and found no other prisoners to have a miscalculated sentence.”

    Source location

    2015-0292-Response-by-Ministry-of-Justice
    Page 1 · response
    Published 20 July 2015

    Open published response

Actions and positions describe what organisations say in published responses. Implementation is not independently verified.

Back to top

Data last updated 7 September 2026