Recurring concern

Failure to ensure door supervisors are licensed and competent for safety-critical work

Get email alerts

Request correction

First reported 2 Jul 2014•Latest report 2 May 2024

Definition

What this concern includes

Includes failures in the door-supervisor licensing and competence-assurance process, including use of unlicensed personnel, inadequate licensing requirements, missing safety qualifications, insufficient training assurance and failure to verify that supervisors remain competent for restraint, asphyxia response, first aid and related safety-critical duties.

Not included

Excludes generic security staffing, event-management or supervision deficiencies where door-supervisor licensing or competence is not the identified unsafe condition.
Excludes failures in the underlying conduct of restraint or emergency response when the door-supervisor licensing and competence controls were adequate.
Excludes general professional registration, training or qualification concerns involving personnel other than door supervisors.
Excludes ordinary licensing administration where no safety-critical licensing, qualification or competence deficiency is identified.

Reports: 2
Individual concerns: 7
Date range: 2014–2024
Stated actions: 0

Reports over time

Reports about this concern issued each year.

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

Most frequent recipients

Reports about this concern sent to each recipient.

Goldies Bar1

Home Office1

North Wales Police1

Security Industry Authority1

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.

2 May2024
Teesside and Hartlepool
Concerns raised1
1. Use of an unlicensed door supervisor
This report raised 3 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.

No linked response statements
No respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
AI-generated summary

Michael Lee DALKIN · 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

Michael Lee DALKIN was socialising in Stockton on 26 December 2019 and the early hours of 27 December, where he was involved in an incident at Goldie’s Bar involving an empty glass and off-duty door supervisors. He collapsed outside the venue and died in an ambulance. The principal concerns related to the use and recording of door supervisors, including an unlicensed supervisor and inaccurate information about the number of operational and effective supervisors.

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
Use of an unlicensed door supervisor
Wider context from the report
“1. The use on an unlicensed door supervisor. ”
Source location
Michael Lee DALKIN · Prevention of Future Deaths report
Page 2 · concerns
Open source report
2 Jul2014
North West Wales
Concerns raised6
1. Lack of required training or knowledge on restraint and asphyxia dangers
2. Failure to audit accredited door-supervisor training on restraint and asphyxia
3. Failure to integrate asphyxia training into restraint training
1. Repeated coronial concern about door-supervisor training on restraint and asphyxia
2. Uncertainty about completion of physical intervention training by licensed door supervisors
3. Lack of a first-aid qualification requirement for door-supervisor licensing
This report raised 5 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.

No linked response statements
No respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
AI-generated summary

Mr Hywel Llewelyn Hughes · 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

Mr Hywel Llewelyn Hughes was forcibly removed from a nightclub, restrained face down by door staff, and later declared deceased in hospital on 3 May 2003. The inquest concluded that the medical cause of death was traumatic asphyxia and that police actions were inappropriate and more probably than not contributed more than minimally to his death. Concerns included training and monitoring of detainees during restraint and transport, and shortcomings in the licensing, training, auditing and review of door supervisors.

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
Lack of required training or knowledge on restraint and asphyxia dangers
Wider context from the report
“(6) The SIA’s standards of conduct, training and levels of supervision issued pursuant to their statutory responsibilities under section 1(2)(e) of the 2001 Act, namely the “Specification for Learning and Qualifications for Door Supervisors” (Feb 2010) and the “Specifications for Learning and Qualifications for Physical Intervention Skills” (Aug 2010), do not include a requirement for training or knowledge on the dangers inherent in restraint, specific modes of restraint, positional asphyxia or traumatic asphyxia. ”
Source location
Mr Hywel Llewelyn Hughes · 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 audit accredited door-supervisor training on restraint and asphyxia
Wider context from the report
“(7) The SIA does not audit the training provided to door supervisors by accredited training providers, particularly on issues of restraint and asphyxia (traumatic and positional). ”
Source location
Mr Hywel Llewelyn Hughes · 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 integrate asphyxia training into restraint training
Wider context from the report
“(8) The mandatory training that door supervisors are required to undertake as a condition of the award of a licence by the SIA does not integrate training on asphyxia into the training on restraint (it is addressed by a limited and discrete element). ”
Source location
Mr Hywel Llewelyn Hughes · 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
Repeated coronial concern about door-supervisor training on restraint and asphyxia
Wider context from the report
“(11) There have already been four ‘Rule 43’ reports to the SIA by Coroners concerning the training of door supervisors on restraint and asphyxia. ”
Source location
Mr Hywel Llewelyn Hughes · 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
Uncertainty about completion of physical intervention training by licensed door supervisors
Wider context from the report
“(10) It is not clear that all persons presently working as door supervisors have yet undertaken physical intervention training (it appears that those who already have a licence will only be required to undertake ‘top training’ when they seek renewal of a licence). ”
Source location
Mr Hywel Llewelyn Hughes · 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
Lack of a first-aid qualification requirement for door-supervisor licensing
Wider context from the report
“(9) The licensing requirements for door supervisors do not include a requirement for a first aid qualification. ”
Source location
Mr Hywel Llewelyn Hughes · Prevention of Future Deaths report
Page 2 · concerns
Open source report

Data last updated 7 September 2026

What this concern includes

Not included

Reports over time

Concerns raised1

Use of an unlicensed door supervisor

Concerns raised6

Lack of required training or knowledge on restraint and asphyxia dangers

Failure to audit accredited door-supervisor training on restraint and asphyxia

Failure to integrate asphyxia training into restraint training

Repeated coronial concern about door-supervisor training on restraint and asphyxia

Uncertainty about completion of physical intervention training by licensed door supervisors

Lack of a first-aid qualification requirement for door-supervisor licensing