Recurring concern

Failure to provide appropriate support to vulnerable victims of crime

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

First reported 11 Feb 2021•Latest report 30 Apr 2021

Definition

What this concern includes

Includes failures to identify eligible vulnerable victims and provide, offer, signpost or coordinate appropriate victim support, including support required by the Victims Code, where the support process is the identified unsafe condition.

Not included

  • Excludes failures in crime recording, investigation, prosecution or victim safeguarding where victim support is not itself deficient.
  • Excludes generic support or mental-health service deficiencies without a specific vulnerable-victim-of-crime context.
  • Excludes support arrangements for people affected by incidents who are not victims of crime unless the assertion explicitly concerns victim support under the same process.
  • Excludes failures limited to specialist support for a particular offence or victim group where that narrower process is the more specific supported concern.
Reports
2

Distinct published reports

Individual concerns
2

A report can raise multiple concerns

Date range
2021–2021

First to latest report issue date

Stated actions
2

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.

Greater Manchester Police2
Greater Manchester Health and Social Care Partnership1

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. Manchester South

    AI-generated summary

    Jade Rayner · 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

    Jade Nicole Rayner was a vulnerable adult with complex mental and physical health needs, including seizures, alcohol use and fluctuating capacity. She was found unresponsive at home on 30 March 2020 and had a fatal level of prescribed antidepressants and alcohol in her system. Concerns included the absence of an effective multi-agency strategy, failures in recording and investigating a reported sexual offence, and alcohol misuse support that could not meet the needs of a complex case involving underlying trauma.

    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 offer support set out in the Victims Code

    Wider context from the report

    “1. The inquest was told that her capacity fluctuated and she was vulnerable. Her social worker reported to Greater Manchester Police and to NWAS that it was believed she had been the victim of a sexual offence involving an employee of NWAS who had initially been to her address in a professional capacity. The inquest heard that NWAS dealt with this robustly through their internal disciplinary process. The inquest was told that GMP did not record it as a crime. The officer giving evidence to the inquest initially gave evidence that GMP had 72 hours to decide if GMP should record a sexual allegation as a crime. It was then indicated that it should have been recorded as a crime. The inquest was told it was not investigated and was written off following a strategy meeting. Jade Rayner was not as a consequence offered by GMP the support set out within the Victims Code. 2. Her case was complex, and the evidence was that there was not a clear multi agency strategy to support her particularly to share information and understand the relationship between earlier Domestic abuse and the subsequent use of alcohol. 3. The evidence was that the existing available alcohol misuse support programmes whilst useful could not meet the needs of a complex case such as this where underlying trauma was a key driver. ”

    Source location

    Jade Rayner · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    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

    The remaining concerns fall under Greater Manchester Police’s remit, so Greater Manchester Health and Social Care Partnership will leave them for police response.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “This letter addresses the issues that fall within the remit of GMHSCP and how we can share the learning from this case. With regard to point 1 of your report I understand that the NWAS Head of Service for Greater Manchester gave evidence at the inquest as to the internal investigation and disciplinary actions taken. The remainder of the concerns raised falls under the remit of Greater Manchester Police and I shall leave it to them for their response.”

    Source location

    2021-0128-Response-from-Greater-Manchester-Health-and-Social-Care-Partnership-Redacted
    Page 1 · response
    Published 4 May 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

    Victim Support referral requires consent, and no referral was required because she had capacity to decide whether to engage.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Furthermore in relation to Jade's victim support, referral to the Victim Support referral service is based in consent, and given that she had capacity to make her own decisions she would not have been referred in the absence of consent to engage with the service.”

    Source location

    2021-0128-Response-from-Greater-Manchester-Police-Redacted
    Page 2 · response
    Published 4 May 2021

    Open published response

  2. Manchester South

    AI-generated summary

    Robert Hardy · 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

    Robert Stephen Hardy was found at home on 6 August 2020 suspended from a ligature; the inquest concluded that his death was suicide. The principal concern was that an assault involving a weapon was not recorded as a crime promptly, affecting the provision of and signposting to appropriate victim support despite his recognised vulnerabilities.

    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 and signpost appropriate victim support to vulnerable victims

    Wider context from the report

    “The evidence before the inquest was that GMP had not recorded the assault with a weapon as a crime within the crime recording system. It was accepted that this should have happened. The concern arises in relation to the impact this then had on the provision of and signposting of him to appropriate victim support given his recognised and known vulnerabilities. ”

    Source location

    Robert Hardy · 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 with Victim Support the point at which victim-support offers and referrals are made, aiming to move them to the earliest possible opportunity.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In relation to victim support, GMP works in partnership with the Victim Support service, commissioned by the GMCA to provide victim support services. This service is designed on a "consent-based," model, which is currently offered and referred, at the point of officer attendance.”

    Source location

    2021-0039-Response-from-Greater-Manchester-Police-Redacted
    Page 2 · response
    Published 15 February 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

    Implement the Making a Difference System to enable staff to offer Victim Services by text message and email for victim self-referral.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “GMP is in the process of implementing the "Making a Difference System," which is a computer system which will give staff the opportunity to make a pre-approved offer of Victim Services via text message and email to victims. This would be a sign-post only and would require the victim to 'self-refer,' into the available services. This system should be implemented by May 2021.”

    Source location

    2021-0039-Response-from-Greater-Manchester-Police-Redacted
    Page 2 · response
    Published 15 February 2021

    Open published response
Back to top

Data last updated 7 September 2026