Recurring concern

Incomplete, inaccurate or unavailable clinical and care records

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

First reported 13 Dec 2008•Latest report 26 Jun 2026

Definition

What this concern includes

Includes failures affecting the completeness, accuracy, consistency, availability, legibility or contemporaneous maintenance of patient, resident and clinical care records.

Not included

  • Information-transfer failures where the underlying records are reliable
  • Documentation dedicated to a separately named safety system when that system supplies the more faithful parent boundary
  • Non-care administrative records
Reports
474

Distinct published reports

Individual concerns
568

A report can raise multiple concerns

Date range
2008–2026

First to latest report issue date

Stated actions
780

Described in published responses

Reports over time

Reports over time

Reports about this concern issued each year.

* 2026 is projected from reports observed to 7 Sep 2026.

Most frequent recipients

Most frequent recipients

Reports about this concern sent to each recipient.

Department of Health and Social Care64
NHS England38
Care Quality Commission30
NHS Greater Manchester Integrated Care Board12
University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust11
Essex Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust10
Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust10
Stockport NHS Foundation Trust10
Tameside and Glossop Integrated Care NHS Foundation Trust10
Office of the Chief Coroner9
Recipient name withheld9
Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust9
Barts Health NHS Trust8
East London NHS Foundation Trust8
Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust8

Concerns and responses across reports

Only concerns grouped under this recurring concern are included. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. Blackpool and the Fylde

    AI-generated summary

    Mark Simpson · 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 Simpson died on 22 October 2025 after being found unresponsive and not breathing at home; the medical cause of death was acute heart failure due to ischaemic heart disease and coronary artery atheroma, with renal cell carcinoma also recorded. The report raises concerns that information about his NHS 111 consultation for prolonged chest pain was assessed by non-medically qualified staff, was not relayed to a clinician, and was not added to his medical record.

    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 add NHS 111 consultation reports to patients’ medical records

    Wider context from the report

    “Concern 2 If reports of this nature, forwarded to a GP Practice after a consultation with the NHS 111 Service, are not added to a patient’s medical record at the Practice, should a subsequent consultation become necessary, the medical professional conducting that consultation in the absence of potentially very relevant information may go on to make inappropriate decisions and place their patient at risk. I believe it is necessary for to raise this concern, but it is not for me to be prescriptive about what should / can be done. ”

    Source location

    Mark Simpson · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 3 · 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

    Place workflow, information coding and clinical correspondence availability concerns on the Health Informatics Group agenda within three months.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Action being taken In taking action, I shall bring these concerns around systems of workflow, coding of information, and the timely availability of correspondence within the clinical record as an agenda item to the Health Informatics Group within the next three months. The RCGP will ask the Group to examine why 111 consultation reports are not consistently recorded in the patient record, and to determine whether action is required to take this forward to the Joint GP IT Committee, to communicate with the wider membership, or both.”

    Source location

    2026-0139 - Response from Royal College of General Practitioners
    Page 2 · response
    Published 12 March 2026

    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

    Ask the Health Informatics Group to examine inconsistent recording of NHS 111 reports and determine whether further escalation or membership communication is required.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Action being taken In taking action, I shall bring these concerns around systems of workflow, coding of information, and the timely availability of correspondence within the clinical record as an agenda item to the Health Informatics Group within the next three months. The RCGP will ask the Group to examine why 111 consultation reports are not consistently recorded in the patient record, and to determine whether action is required to take this forward to the Joint GP IT Committee, to communicate with the wider membership, or both.”

    Source location

    2026-0139 - Response from Royal College of General Practitioners
    Page 2 · response
    Published 12 March 2026

    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

    Use this case to inform guidance, member communications and engagement with system partners on safe handling of clinical correspondence.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We are committed to learning from Mr Simpson's death. The RCGP will ensure this case informs our guidance, our communications to members, and our engagement with system partners on the safe handling of clinical correspondence. We would welcome the opportunity to update the Coroner on the outcomes of these actions in due course.”

    Source location

    2026-0139 - Response from Royal College of General Practitioners
    Page 3 · response
    Published 12 March 2026

    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

    ICBs, as GP contract commissioners, are responsible for monitoring compliance and taking action when practices breach contractual requirements.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In summary: (1) GMC Good Medical Practice requires clear, accurate and contemporaneous records and emphasises continuity of care and information sharing before referral; (2) regulation 67 specifically requires GP contractors to keep adequate records and include clinical reports from other services/professionals; (3) the GP contract makes referral part of essential services and includes explicit requirements to review NHS 111 “Post Event Messages” and out-of-hours clinical details within specified timescales. These standards and contractual requirements are directly relevant to the handling and incorporation of NHS 111/out-of-hours information into the patient record and to the responsibilities that continue while a patient is awaiting specialist care. We expect ICBs, as commissioners of GP contracts, to monitor GP practice compliance with, and performance against, the contract.”

    Source location

    2026-0139 - Response from DHSC
    Page 2 · response
    Published 12 March 2026

    Open published response
  2. Gwent

    AI-generated summary

    Alan Bevis TOMLINSON · 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

    Alan Bevis TOMLINSON attended hospital on 16 April 2024 with illness, significant weight loss, anaemia and swelling around his pacemaker site, but was advised to return home because no cardiac bed was available. He died at home on 18 April 2024 from the effects of untreated infective endocarditis, likely associated with a longstanding infection at the pacemaker implant site. Concerns included missed referral to cardiology despite increasing pacemaker thresholds and visible illness, and failures to identify infective endocarditis, gather and document clinical information, and communicate findings effectively.

    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

    Inadequate documentation of clinical findings

    Wider context from the report

    “Evidence from the Chief Physiologist identified wider concerns within the service, including: 1. Lack of guidance on when pacemaker data should trigger cardiology review; 2. Limited physiologist knowledge of infective endocarditis; 3. Inconsistent gathering of clinical information and implant site checks during clinic visits; 4. How clinical findings were documented and communicated, particularly to the Cardiology team. ”

    Source location

    Alan Bevis TOMLINSON · 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

    Introduce a clinical history sheet requiring red-flag assessment and documented inspection of device implantation sites during device-check appointments.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Enhanced Clinical Assessment Standards”

    Source location

    Response from Cardiff and Vale University Health Board
    Page 2 · response
    Published 10 March 2026

    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

    Conduct monthly notes audits during the quarter following SOP presentation.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “• Monthly notes audits will be conducted for the quarter following presentation of the SOP on the 13th of May.”

    Source location

    Response from Cardiff and Vale University Health Board
    Page 2 · response
    Published 10 March 2026

    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

    Require clinic entries to document clinical findings, implant-site observations, red flags, patient symptoms, device data, and associated tests.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Strengthened Documentation and Communication Pathways”

    Source location

    Response from Cardiff and Vale University Health Board
    Page 2 · response
    Published 10 March 2026

    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

    Establish audits of notes-standard compliance and e-Advice usage and response times.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Audit and Quality Assurance”

    Source location

    Response from Cardiff and Vale University Health Board
    Page 2 · response
    Published 10 March 2026

    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

    Implement the Fysicon electronic patient record to incorporate clinical notes and provide trend data for clinical decision-making.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Digital Support We are implementing the Fysicon system, which is an electronic patient record. This will incorporate all clinical notes and will provide trend data to further enhance the clinical decision making and improve patient outcomes.”

    Source location

    Response from Cardiff and Vale University Health Board
    Page 2 · response
    Published 10 March 2026

    Open published response
  3. North London

    AI-generated summary

    Asher Blackman · 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

    Asher Blackman died in hospital on 21 September 2025 after collapsing at home, where he was found to be profoundly hypoglycaemic. Concerns included the District Nurses’ failure to record next-of-kin details or procedures for inability to gain access, and a no-access policy that did not address police involvement where the patient’s life might be at risk.

    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 record what to do when the district nurse cannot gain access

    Wider context from the report

    “That the initial assessment for Mr Blackman by the District Nurses did not record his next of kin details or what to do should the district nurse not be able to gain access. The policy following no access did not take into account the need for police involvement where the life of the patient may be at risk through non access. ”

    Source location

    Asher Blackman · 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

    Conduct Trust-wide engagement events to review no-access clinical practice and reinforce comprehensive records and emergency-contact documentation.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “On behalf of Central London Community Healthcare NHS Trust (CLCH), I would like to express again our sincere condolences to Mr Blackman’s family. The Trust has carefully reviewed the matters raised in your report and, to ensure that we fully reflect on and learn from the events leading to the death of Mr Blackman, has undertaken a programme of Trust-wide engagement events. These sessions have been designed to review clinical practice and the application of the ‘No Access: Not Seen: Disengagement Policy’, ensuring that current approaches to managing situations where clinical staff are unable to gain access to a patient appropriately identify and assess all potential risks, and that proportionate mitigations are implemented to meet individual patient need.”

    Source location

    Response from Central London Community Healthcare NHS Trust
    Page 1 · response
    Published 10 March 2026

    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

    Implemented improvements to no-access arrangements and the proportionate PSIRF response directly address the reported concerns and strengthen patient safeguards.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Central London Community Healthcare NHS Trust has formally reviewed the incident in accordance with its Patient Safety Incident Response Framework (PSIRF) and has identified opportunities to enhance existing processes. The Trust is assured that the actions implemented to embed improvements within the No Access: Not Seen: Disengagement arrangements, together with the proportionate PSIRF response, directly address the concerns raised in your report and significantly strengthen safeguards for patients receiving community nursing services.”

    Source location

    Response from Central London Community Healthcare NHS Trust
    Page 3 · response
    Published 10 March 2026

    Open published response
  4. Essex

    AI-generated summary

    Viviana-Ray Winnie Elsie Wendy Butnaru · 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

    Viviana-Ray Winnie Elsie Wendy Butnaru attended the Children’s Emergency Department on 24 October 2024 and died at Basildon Hospital on 25 October 2024 after cardiac arrest. The stated cause of death was myocarditis caused by Parvovirus, contributed to by bronchiolitis and bronchopneumonia. Concerns included delayed reporting of chest X-rays showing cardiomegaly, incomplete exploration of metabolic acidosis, failures in escalation and review processes, and incomplete documentation and handovers.

    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

    Incomplete documentation of nursing observations and escalations

    Wider context from the report

    “(5) Incomplete documentation to be addressed to include all updates from nursing staff in relation to observations and escalations; and handovers from the medical team to one another to be clearly recorded. ”

    Source location

    Viviana-Ray Winnie Elsie Wendy Butnaru · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 3 · 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

    Deliver CEWT refresher training emphasizing documentation of nursing observations, escalations and responses.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The paediatric service recognises that there were gaps in fully documenting nursing observations and escalation actions. In response, Children’s Early Warning Tool (CEWT) refresher training has been delivered to all relevant nursing and support staff, with specific emphasis on clear documentation of escalations made and responses received.”

    Source location

    Response from Mid and South Essex NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 3 · response
    Published 9 March 2026

    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

    Implement the National Paediatric Early Warning System across paediatric services, including revised escalation criteria and dedicated escalation records.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In parallel, the Trust is implementing the National Paediatric Early Warning System (nPEWS) across paediatric services. Robust governance arrangements are in place, including a weekly task-and-finish group to oversee delivery and provide assurance. A comprehensive 12-week education and training programme started on 13 April 2026 for the planned June 2026 go-live, ensuring staff are prepared and supported.”

    Source location

    Response from Mid and South Essex NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 3 · response
    Published 9 March 2026

    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

    Continue monthly documentation audits across Children’s ED and inpatient wards, with feedback and reminders addressing identified documentation deficiencies.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In addition, monthly documentation audits continue across both Children’s ED and the inpatient wards. Documentation compliance in Children’s ED remained above 95% between October 2025 and March 2026. On the inpatient wards, compliance ranged between 75% and 95% during the same period. Reduced compliance identified in December 2025 related to illegible handwriting, unsigned amendments, and incomplete nursing documentation. Feedback was provided directly to staff, with reminders regarding documentation standards and their importance for patient safety and medico-legal assurance. Subsequent audits have demonstrated improved compliance, indicating that learning has been embedded.”

    Source location

    Response from Mid and South Essex NHS Foundation Trust
    Page 3 · response
    Published 9 March 2026

    Open published response
  5. East London

    AI-generated summary

    Urmila Patel · 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

    Urmila Patel, aged 78, was admitted to hospital with suspected sepsis and later fell in a ward toilet on 29 June 2025. She subsequently deteriorated and died in hospital on 7 July 2025 after a CT scan identified a significant subdural haematoma. The concerns included inadequate falls-risk assessment, mobility care planning, supervision, assessment for intracranial bleeding, timely CT referral, and review of her warfarin after the fall.

    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 record falls

    Wider context from the report

    “1. The failure of nurses on the ward to instigate an adequate falls risk assessment of Mrs Patel. 2. The failure of nursing staff on the ward to produce a meaningful care-plan for Mrs Patel’s mobility. 3. The failure of Trust staff to note a fall on 23rd June 2025 and reassess risk of falls. 4. The failure of nursing staff on the ward to monitor and supervise Mrs Patel on the afternoon of 29th June 2025. 5. The failure of Trust staff to adequately assess the likelihood of a traumatic intra-cranial bleed following the fall on 29th June 2025. 6. The failure of the duty doctor to act decisively and refer Mrs Patel for an urgent CT Head scan on 29th June 2025. 7. The failure of the duty doctor to review Mrs Patel’s warfarin prescription after the fall. 8. The failure of ward staff on the ward round on 30th June 2025 to read the clinical records from the previous day to alert them to Mrs Patel’s fall on 29th June 2025. ”

    Source location

    Urmila Patel · 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

    Introduce a mandatory post-fall care bundle and checklist requiring structured assessment, neurological observations, escalation triggers and clinical documentation.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “A mandatory post-fall care bundle and checklist has been introduced for all inpatient falls. This ensures that each fall is managed as a clinical event requiring structured assessment and response, aligned to the Patient Safety Incident Response Framework.”

    Source location

    Response from Barts Health NHS Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 3 March 2026

    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

    Reinforce contemporaneous documentation and communication of inpatient falls and significant safety events during nursing and medical handovers.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Actions taken The Trust has reinforced expectations that all inpatient falls and significant safety events are documented contemporaneously and clearly communicated during both nursing and medical handover.”

    Source location

    Response from Barts Health NHS Trust
    Page 3 · response
    Published 3 March 2026

    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

    NHS England, which oversees the issues raised, is responsible for responding directly to the Prevention of Future Deaths report.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Given the concerns you have raised I feel it is important that you receive a response directly from NHS England as it has oversight for the issues you raise. Therefore, my officials have contacted NHS England who have agreed to respond to you directly about the Prevention of Future Death report concerning Mrs Patel.”

    Source location

    Response from Department of Health and Social Care
    Page 1 · response
    Published 3 March 2026

    Open published response
  6. Inner North London

    AI-generated summary

    Sean Perry WILLIAMS · 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

    Sean Williams died in the back of a Serco van outside Thames Magistrates’ Court after suffering a fit during transport and then a cardiac arrest. Concerns included gaps in his custody healthcare assessment and treatment, inadequate Serco first-aid training and competence assessment, failure to provide timely first aid, unclear emergency procedures, and insufficient emphasis on preserving life.

    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 assess and record the clinical picture before and after prescribing

    Wider context from the report

    “For the MPS The MPS had already recognised before inquest that, following Mr Williams’ detention, he was not seen by a custody nurse for 23 hours. However, there was another sub optimal element of his care that did not appear to have been identified. The custody nurse who reviewed Mr Williams on two separate occasions in the twelve hours immediately before he attended court, did not on the second occasion take any observations of Mr Williams’ vital signs before (or after) prescribing dihydrocodeine, and did not record any part of Mr Williams’ clinical picture. Despite having prescribed dihydrocodeine for drug withdrawal, when giving evidence in court the nurse was unable to describe the signs and symptoms of withdrawal. For Serco By 18.11 hours, the Serco van that was transporting Mr Williams had returned to the court car park entrance and the driver had got out of the cab and into the back of the van. At that point, neither the escort nor the driver opened the door to Mr Williams’ cell to administer first aid - at the very least to relieve his slumped, squashed position to try to deal with any potential airway obstruction. At 18.15 hours when he stopped showing any signs of life, they still did not open his door. They only opened his door at 18.23 hours, removing him from the cell at 18.24 hours, and administering chest compressions at 18.25 hours. The driver did not press the emergency button in the cab to alert the operations control centre of the situation. The Serco crew did call the London Ambulance Service from the van, but were unable to give the postcode of their location. I put it to the Serco driver that the focus of the two Serco crew members seemed to be on talking to the three other prisoners in their cells, on phone calls, in fact on anything except getting Mr Williams out of his cell to see if the crew could help him. The driver agreed. The Serco driver eventually administered chest compressions but could not face giving rescue breaths. He seemed to have forgotten that he had a face guard hanging from his belt. Despite evidence from Serco that they were satisfied with the first aid training that was given to the two officers, the jury found that: - the Serco first aid training was inadequate; - it did not include a video of a seizure; - it did not sufficiently emphasise the urgency of potentially life saving measures such as use of the recovery position; - the Serco assessment of the first aid knowledge and competence of its staff was inadequate; - Serco failed to provide clear guidance on the emergency button procedures; - Serco’s policy appeared to conflict with its training slides about whether staff should or are even permitted to drive a casualty direct to hospital; - Serco gave insufficient emphasis on urgency and the paramount importance of preserving life. ”

    Source location

    Sean Perry WILLIAMS · 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

    Implement SYSTMOne templates requiring vital-sign and other observation recording during initial assessments and clinical reviews.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “It is a requirement that the HCP records a full set of vital signs and other observations (e.g. COWS - Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale) prior to medication administration. In April 2024, the new SYSTMOne³ templates were created which mandate a set of vital signs (unless the patient refuses) to be recorded at the initial clinical assessment and when reviews take place.”

    Source location

    Response from Metropolitan Police Service
    Page 2 · response
    Published 24 February 2026

    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

    Audit healthcare practitioners’ clinical documentation and provide feedback, guidance, and additional training where practice or records fall below the required standard.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Clinical Practice Guidelines followed by HCP in custody highlight this approach to safe care and assessment of detainees. Compliance with guidelines and quality of care delivered is monitored through HCP audits led by the Senior HCPs in each area. Feedback and guidance are provided where the documentation falls below, standards or there are learning needs to provide the standard of care expected from all HCPs working in MPS Custody Suites.”

    Source location

    Response from Metropolitan Police Service
    Page 3 · response
    Published 24 February 2026

    Open published response
  7. Manchester West

    AI-generated summary

    Samuel John DICKINSON · 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

    Samuel John DICKINSON, a 39-year-old farmer who held firearms and shotgun licences, was found on 15 September 2025 with a shotgun wound to the head in an outbuilding at the farm where he lived. The inquest concluded that his death was suicide, with the medical cause recorded as severe head injury. Concerns were raised about gaps in firearms legislation and General Practitioner recording and reporting obligations relating to licence holders’ illnesses or mental health conditions.

    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 require General Practitioner practices to record firearms licence holdings in medical records

    Wider context from the report

    “1. During the course of evidence it was reflected that Firearms Legislation relating to the holding of a shotgun or firearms licence (or both) contains no provision that a person holding a certificate must self report any illness or mental health condition which may give rise to a change in circumstances from the time when a grant of licence has been made, differing from obligations for example on a person holding a driving licence to do so. 2. Further it was stated that there is no obligation or provision requiring a General Practitioner practice to: a. Clearly record the holding of a licence on medical records when advised of the grant, in order to assist with flagging any relevant issues that may need reporting (such as conditions listed on an initial firearms/shotgun application form or renewal) b. Requiring the reporting of such issues on a reasonable basis to a firearms licence unit of a local police force 3. The above were described as ‘gaps’ in the legislation which may give rise to the risk of future death. ”

    Source location

    Samuel John DICKINSON · 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

    Roll out digital markers for firearms certificate holders across all GP IT systems in England.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “This process has been further strengthened within GP IT systems, where a GP can add a digital marker to the patient record, to note that the patient has a firearms certificate. This was fully rolled out to all GP IT systems in England by May 2023. If the patient begins to experience a relevant medical condition while the certificate is valid, upon discussion with the GP, the GP will see an alert and upon assessment, can ask the patient to contact the police or the GP can flag this to the police directly, with consent for this provided in the initial application. This allows the police to review the person’s continued suitability, and if necessary, revoke the certificate. Within the existing system there is also provision to record when contact has been made with the police as a result of a digital marker flag.”

    Source location

    Response from Department of Health and Social Care
    Page 2 · response
    Published 13 February 2026

    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

    Implement a digital firearms marker across GP surgeries to alert doctors about relevant conditions and prompt police notifications.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “person is granted a firearm or shotgun certificate, and this remains on the system for the five years’ duration of the licence. If a certificate holder sees their GP regarding a relevant medical condition during this period, the doctor can advise the police of this, enabling the police to carry out a review as to whether the person remains suitable to have a licence.”

    Source location

    Response from Home Office
    Page 2 · response
    Published 13 February 2026

    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

    Review whether and how to mandate the digital firearms marker in future.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “A new digital version of the firearms marker was introduced to all GP surgeries in England in May 2023. The digital firearms marker automatically alerts the doctor if a patient is seen regarding a relevant medical condition and reminds the GP to advise the police. This improves the safety of the system and helps to ensure that the firearms marker is not missed by GPs. The data we have on the use of the digital marker shows that it is now being applied by GPs. In 2024-25, over 98,000 digital markers were applied by GPs to the medical record of those granted or renewed a firearm or shotgun certificate and there were over 1,100 cases in which the GP notified the police of a medical concern about a licence holder, following a review prompted by the digital firearms marker.”

    Source location

    Response from Home Office
    Page 2 · response
    Published 13 February 2026

    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

    Existing medical suitability controls, GP markers, and police-reporting arrangements are considered sufficient to address relevant-condition recording and reporting concerns.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Department have worked closely with the Home Office and the British Medical Association to ensure there are strong controls in place in relation to an applicant’s medical suitability which is an important element of the application process that the police consider when deciding if an applicant can hold a firearms or shotgun certificate.”

    Source location

    Response from Department of Health and Social Care
    Page 1 · response
    Published 13 February 2026

    Open published response
  8. Northumberland

    AI-generated summary

    Ellen Victoria Floyd Taylor · 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

    Ellen Victoria Floyd Taylor, aged 69, died on 1 July 2025 after a nasogastric tube perforated her small intestine, resulting in acute peritonitis. Her previous gastric bypass surgery and altered anatomy were not known to treating professionals, and the report raises concerns about the lack of guidance and wider NHS risk regarding nasogastric tube insertion in patients with previous gastric surgery.

    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 make previous altered gastric anatomy apparent in clinical notes

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) Ms Taylor underwent gastric/bariatric surgery in 2009. As a result of this her oesophagus was not attached to her stomach but instead attached to her small bowel. On 25th June 2025 she was admitted to hospital having suffered a stroke and was deemed to require a nasogastric tube. The fact that she has previous surgery and her anatomy was therefore altered was not obvious from her notes. As such when complications began this was not something that was considered and investigations about potential perforation were not undertaken initially. (2) I heard evidence that the time there were no guidelines about insertion of nasogastric tubes in circumstances where someone had had previous gastric surgery. The Northumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust identified areas of learning as a result of the circumstances of Ms Taylor’s death. The key finding from the After Action Review was that the previous gastric surgery was not recognised at the time of the nasogastric tube insertion. Previous surgery was not a routine consideration and not included within the nasogastric tube guideline. Local guidelines have now changed and consultation with on-call surgical team for guidance about insertion of the tube in these circumstances is now included in the process. Training has taken place and a clinical safety message circulated to increase awareness. Whilst the local NHS Traut have taken and implemented these steps my concern is that there is a wider risk, and these are circumstances that are relevant to every NHS Trust nationally and there is a risk future deaths will occur unless action is taken. ”

    Source location

    Ellen Victoria Floyd Taylor · 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

    Support provider organisations to adopt and safely implement electronic patient records, including improved interoperability and information sharing.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “NHS England has developed and led for the last 5 years a Frontline Digitisation (FD) Programme, which has supported provider organisations across England to adopt Electronic Patient Record (EPR) systems which support increased consistency in digital maturity but also improve information sharing within and between organisations.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS England
    Page 2 · response
    Published 13 February 2026

    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

    Work with the Shared Care Records Programme to support wider access to relevant patient information.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “NHS England is aware of the challenge in sharing medical records and results within organisations and recognises the variability between areas using different technologies. The FD programme continues to work across the health and care system to support greater integration and awareness of record sharing between providers. NHS England is also working with the Shared Care Records Programme which supports wider access to relevant patient information.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS England
    Page 3 · response
    Published 13 February 2026

    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

    Publish a ten-year healthcare plan committing to a single, secure and authoritative patient record.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Developing this further NHS England and the Department of Health and Social Care published the Fit for the future: 10 Year Plan for England, which sets out the government’s plan for healthcare in England over the next 10 years. It also sets out a commitment to give patients ‘a single, secure and authoritative account of their data – a single patient record – to enable more coordinated, personalised and predictive care.’”

    Source location

    Response from NHS England
    Page 3 · response
    Published 13 February 2026

    Open published response
  9. Northumberland

    AI-generated summary

    Ellen Victoria Floyd Taylor · 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

    Ellen Victoria Floyd Taylor, aged 69, died on 1 July 2025 after a nasogastric tube perforated her small intestine, leading to acute peritonitis. Her previous gastric bypass surgery and altered anatomy were not known to treating professionals, and the perforation was not initially recognised. The report identifies concerns about the absence of guidance for inserting nasogastric tubes in patients with previous gastric surgery and a wider risk to patients nationally.

    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 make previous gastric surgery and altered anatomy apparent in clinical notes

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) Ms Taylor underwent gastric/bariatric surgery in 2009. As a result of this her oesophagus was not attached to her stomach but instead attached to her small bowel. On 25th June 2025 she was admitted to hospital having suffered a stroke and was deemed to require a nasogastric tube. The fact that she has previous surgery and her anatomy was therefore altered was not obvious from her notes. As such when complications began this was not something that was considered and investigations about potential perforation were not undertaken initially. (2) I heard evidence that the time there were no guidelines about insertion of nasogastric tubes in circumstances where someone had had previous gastric surgery. The Northumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust identified areas of learning as a result of the circumstances of Ms Taylor’s death. The key finding from the After Action Review was that the previous gastric surgery was not recognised at the time of the nasogastric tube insertion. Previous surgery was not a routine consideration and not included within the nasogastric tube guideline. Local guidelines have now changed and consultation with on-call surgical team for guidance about insertion of the tube in these circumstances is now included in the process. Training has taken place and a clinical safety message circulated to increase awareness. Whilst the local NHS Traut have taken and implemented these steps my concern is that there is a wider risk, and these are circumstances that are relevant to every NHS trust nationally and there is a risk future deaths will occur unless action is taken. ”

    Source location

    Ellen Victoria Floyd Taylor · 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

    Lead the Frontline Digitisation Programme to support provider adoption and implementation of electronic patient record systems that improve information sharing.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “NHS England has developed and led for the last 5 years a Frontline Digitisation (FD) Programme, which has supported provider organisations across England to adopt Electronic Patient Record (EPR) systems which support increased consistency in digital maturity but also improve information sharing within and between organisations.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS England
    Page 2 · response
    Published 15 June 2026

    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

    Continue working across the health and care system and with the Shared Care Records Programme to support greater integration and access to relevant patient information.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “NHS England is aware of the challenge in sharing medical records and results within organisations and recognises the variability between areas using different technologies. The FD programme continues to work across the health and care system to support greater integration and awareness of record sharing between providers. NHS England is also working with the Shared Care Records Programme which supports wider access to relevant patient information.”

    Source location

    Response from NHS England
    Page 3 · response
    Published 15 June 2026

    Open published response
  10. Essex

    AI-generated summary

    Elise Kay Louise Sebastian · 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

    Elise Kay Louise Sebastian tied a fatal ligature in her room on Longview Ward on 17 April 2021 and died two days later in hospital. The principal concerns included inadequate and falsified observations, insufficiently trained and staffed ward personnel, poor communication about ligaturing and self-harm, medication-recording errors, failures involving Oxevision, and other care and record-keeping deficiencies.

    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

    Incomplete, inaccurate and inconsistent care records

    Wider context from the report

    “9. Elise’s key nurse was working nights and was not having the required 1:1 with Elise and key documents were not completed for Elise’s care. Inaccuracies and inconsistencies in record-keeping remains a concern. ”

    Source location

    Elise Kay Louise Sebastian · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 5 · 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

    Inconsistent and contradictory observation records

    Wider context from the report

    “5. The observation level for each young person is decided by the medical staff at the Trust and can be altered dependent on the patient’s risk level. The Trust Policy had a protocol on how observations should be conducted. All observations should be recorded by the staff on formal observation sheets. There were sheets for Level 1 and another sheet for the levels 2,3 & 4. Risk assessments were incomplete and not all ligatures were included. The entries in the records were not all consistent, some contradicted others and this included the levels of observations required to keep Elise safe on the observation charts that were required to be completed. This was confusing and remains a concern as these are entries made by qualified Trust staff who have received training in observations. During the Trust internal investigation after Elise’s death, the investigator visited the ward and found observations were not being conducted in accordance with the Trust Policy. ”

    Source location

    Elise Kay Louise Sebastian · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 4 · 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

    Continue the Record Keeping Safety Improvement Programme to improve documentation through education and guidance.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Trust has continued with a Record Keeping Safety Improvement Programme (SIP). This SIP program is focusing on improving patient safety in respect of documentation specifically through education and development of appropriate guidance.”

    Source location

    2026-0078 - Response from Essex University Partnership Trust
    Page 11 · response
    Published 13 February 2026

    Open published response
Back to top

Data last updated 7 September 2026