Recurring concern

Inadequate lifejacket safety controls for watercraft users

First to latest report 4 Jul 2014 — 20 Dec 2024

Reports that mention this concern: 4
Times this concern has been raised: 5
Stated actions linked to this concern: 6

What this concern includes

Includes failures of controls specifically intended to ensure lifejackets or comparable personal flotation devices are available, carried or worn by people using watercraft, including jet skis and vessels.

What is not included

Excludes general water-safety, navigation, supervision or lifeguard deficiencies unless they directly concern lifejacket or personal-flotation-device controls.
Excludes failures involving other water-safety equipment unless the assertion also concerns lifejacket or personal-flotation-device provision, carriage or use.
Excludes factual descriptions of strong currents, submerged rocks or other water hazards without an identified lifejacket-control deficiency.

Trends

Reports over time

Reports mentioning this concern, 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.

Canal & River Trust1

Department for Transport1

Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office1

Maritime and Coastguard Agency1

Royal Yachting Association1

Reports and published responses 4 reports

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

20 Dec2024
Dorset
Concerns raised2
1. Lack of legal requirement to wear lifejackets
2. Failure to require carriage of personal flotation devices on all vessels
This report raised 6 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Linked responses

Department for Transport
Royal Yachting Association
Respondent positions 4
1. Royal Yachting Association
  Operational standards for recreational and small commercial vessels are outside the respondent’s authority.
  Outside remit
1. Royal Yachting Association
  The MCA and relevant harbour authorities are responsible for regulating recreational and small commercial vessel operations.
  Redirects responsibility
2. Royal Yachting Association
  Decisions to mandate lifejacket carriage for all vessels belong to the Secretary of State for Transport, not the respondent.
  Redirects responsibility
3. Department for Transport
  Mandatory personal flotation device requirements are not introduced because there is insufficient evidence to justify regulatory intervention.
  Unable to act
AI-generated summary

David John Haw · 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

David John Haw was thrown from a support RHIB after it collided with a buoy in Poole Harbour at approximately 30 knots on 2 May 2022. He was recovered from the water on 14 May 2022, and the inquest recorded drowning and concluded unlawful killing. The concerns include differing safety requirements for pleasure and commercial vessels, alcohol use by pleasure-vessel helms, the absence of requirements for lifejackets on some vessels, and the use and regulation of support boats at sailing events.

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 legal requirement to wear lifejackets
Wider context from the report
“Further, I have a concern that personal floatation devices, such as lifejackets or buoyancy aids are not legally required to be carried on all vessels, nor is there any legal requirement to wear lifejackets. The current legislation, The Merchant Shipping (Life-Saving Appliances and Arrangements) Regulations 2020, only requires pleasure vessels of over 13.7 metres in length to carry lifesaving appliances. I have concern that the lack of life saving appliances on all vessels could lead to future deaths. ”
Source location
David John Haw · Prevention of Future Deaths report
Page 3 · 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 require carriage of personal flotation devices on all vessels
Wider context from the report
“Further, I have a concern that personal floatation devices, such as lifejackets or buoyancy aids are not legally required to be carried on all vessels, nor is there any legal requirement to wear lifejackets. The current legislation, The Merchant Shipping (Life-Saving Appliances and Arrangements) Regulations 2020, only requires pleasure vessels of over 13.7 metres in length to carry lifesaving appliances. I have concern that the lack of life saving appliances on all vessels could lead to future deaths. ”
Source location
David John Haw · Prevention of Future Deaths report
Page 3 · 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
Operational standards for recreational and small commercial vessels are outside the respondent’s authority.

Verbatim wording from the response
“Whilst the RYA has the authority to determine the standards for its courses and for the conditions under which RYA recognised training centres operate, it does not have the authority to determine or enforce standards for operations within either the recreational sector or small commercial vessel sector. This responsibility falls to the MCA as the UK maritime regulator, and to local harbour authorities who have certain powers within their respective jurisdiction.”

Source location
Response from Royal Yachting Association
Page 1 · response
Published 27 December 2024
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
The MCA and relevant harbour authorities are responsible for regulating recreational and small commercial vessel operations.

Verbatim wording from the response
“Whilst the RYA has the authority to determine the standards for its courses and for the conditions under which RYA recognised training centres operate, it does not have the authority to determine or enforce standards for operations within either the recreational sector or small commercial vessel sector. This responsibility falls to the MCA as the UK maritime regulator, and to local harbour authorities who have certain powers within their respective jurisdiction.”

Source location
Response from Royal Yachting Association
Page 1 · response
Published 27 December 2024
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
Decisions to mandate lifejacket carriage for all vessels belong to the Secretary of State for Transport, not the respondent.

Verbatim wording from the response
“Any decision to mandate the carriage of personal flotation devices for all vessels would be a matter for the Secretary of State for Transport and not for the RYA. The practical difficulties of enforcing the carriage of lifejackets are highlighted, given that pleasure vessels are not subject to the same inspection regime as commercial vessels, and it is also noted that the existing legislation applicable to commercial vessels does not mandate the wearing of a lifejacket unless there is an emergency or risk of entering the water, and accordingly applying the commercial standard would not result in a blanket requirement to wear a lifejacket or buoyancy aid. Therefore, the RYA remains of the opinion that the need to wear a lifejacket or buoyancy aid on a pleasure vessel is best communicated via education and training rather than legislation.”

Source location
Response from Royal Yachting Association
Page 4 · response
Published 27 December 2024
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
Mandatory personal flotation device requirements are not introduced because there is insufficient evidence to justify regulatory intervention.

Verbatim wording from the response
“Although there is currently no legislation requiring the mandatory wearing of personal flotation devices (PFDs) on any pleasure vessel in the UK, there is not yet sufficient evidence to justify a regulatory intervention to this effect. Some local water authorities, ports and marinas do require this under their by-laws and, of course, voluntary wear is strongly encouraged as publicised by the MCA through Marine Guidance Note (MGN) 599 (M) Amendment 1 “Pleasure vessels – Regulations and Exemptions – Guidance and Best Practice Advice”. This MGN also provides a range of guidance and best practice advice for pleasure vessel owners which includes appropriate training and avoiding consumption of alcohol as well as the wearing of PFDs.”

Source location
Response from Department for Transport
Page 2 · response
Published 27 December 2024
Open published response
1 Nov2023
Inner North London
Concerns raised1
1. Failure to supply lifejackets to people hiring jet skis
This report raised 3 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
No linked response statements
No respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
AI-generated summary

Musa Sidique Konteh · 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

Musa Sidique Konteh went missing after hiring a jet ski alone at a beach resort in Sierra Leone on 19 March 2023; his body was found in the water on 22 March 2023. Concerns included the reported lack of health and safety procedures for jet-ski users, including no emergency engine cut-off instructions, no guidance about submerged rocks, and no supplied lifejackets, as well as travel advice that did not warn that local health and safety standards might be lower than those experienced in the UK.

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 supply lifejackets to people hiring jet skis
Wider context from the report
“(1) Little, if any, health and safety procedures were in place for those hiring jet skis. For example: no instructions on the use of the emergency engine cut-off were given; no instructions were given on any areas to avoid, in the context of an area with many submerged rocks; and no lifejackets were supplied to people hiring jet skis. (2) The relevant Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office travel advice, warns of strong currents and the absence of lifeguards on beaches; however, it does not advise travellers that health and safety standards may be lower than people may experience in UK. ”
Source location
Musa Sidique Konteh · Prevention of Future Deaths report
Page 2 · concerns
Open source report
10 Nov2016
Carmarthenshire and Pembrokeshire
Concerns raised1
1. Lack of mandatory wearing of personal flotation devices on fishing vessel decks at sea
Linked response

Maritime and Coastguard Agency
Stated actions 2
1. Maritime and Coastguard Agency
  Review high-priority personal flotation device policies and consider additional safety steps, including developing legislation for fishing vessels.
2. Maritime and Coastguard Agency
  Convene an extraordinary Fishing Industry Safety Group meeting to obtain stakeholder input on flotation-device policy and potential legislative steps.
AI-generated summary

Gareth Willington and Daniel James Willington · 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

Gareth Willington and his son Daniel James Willington went out on their fishing boat on 28 April 2016. Gareth was recovered from the sea and pronounced dead at hospital, while Daniel’s body was not recovered; an MAIB report concluded that both men went overboard after Daniel became entangled in a rope and Gareth went to assist him. Neither man was wearing a personal flotation device, and the substantive concern was that wearing such devices on fishing vessels’ working decks was not mandatory.

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 mandatory wearing of personal flotation devices on fishing vessel decks at sea
Wider context from the report
“That the wearing of personal flotation devices whilst on deck is not mandatory. The report from the MAIB in their report no 22/2016 states “the benefits of wearing PFDs on the exposed decks of fishing vessels are incontrovertible”. Legislation requiring the compulsory wearing of personal flotation devices on the working decks of fishing vessels while at sea would lead to a reduction in the number of deaths at sea. ”
Source location
Gareth Willington and Daniel James Willington · 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
Review high-priority personal flotation device policies and consider additional safety steps, including developing legislation for fishing vessels.

Verbatim wording from the response
“In response to this report, the MCA is reviewing, as a high priority, the current policies around wearing personal flotation devices and considering what additional steps, including the development of legislation, could be taken.”

Source location
2016-0396-Response-by-Maritime-and-Coastguard-Agency
Page 2 · response
Published 10 November 2016
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
Convene an extraordinary Fishing Industry Safety Group meeting to obtain stakeholder input on flotation-device policy and potential legislative steps.

Verbatim wording from the response
“This work will require the input of all fishing stakeholders and we will provide an update to both the recommendation of the MAIB and your report in early 2017, following an extraordinary meeting of the Fishing Industry Safety Group convened by the MCA on 11 January 2017.”

Source location
2016-0396-Response-by-Maritime-and-Coastguard-Agency
Page 2 · response
Published 10 November 2016
Open published response
4 Jul2014
Stoke-on-Trent and North Staffordshire
Concerns raised1
1. Lack of requirement for persons in the tunnel to wear safety jackets or buoyancy aids
This report raised 2 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Linked response

Canal & River Trust
Stated actions 4
1. Canal & River Trust
  Continue encouraging boaters to wear lifejackets or buoyancy aids, particularly in tunnels.
2. Canal & River Trust
  Modify tunnel portal signs across the network to recommend wearing lifejackets.
3. Canal & River Trust
  Conduct an education campaign through boater communication channels about lifejacket and buoyancy-aid benefits.
1. Canal & River Trust
  Modify the Harecastle Tunnel briefing to emphasise lifejackets and explain temperature changes inside the tunnel.
AI-generated summary

Michael Holgate · 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 Holgate fell into the water after the narrow boat he was steering collided with the side of Harecastle Tunnel on 20 May 2014. The concerns included the lack of communication facilities in the tunnel, the absence of a requirement for people on board to wear buoyancy aids, the availability of safety helmets, and the safety information provided to tunnel users.

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 requirement for persons in the tunnel to wear safety jackets or buoyancy aids
Wider context from the report
“2. There is no requirement to wear safety jackets/buoyancy aids in the tunnel. These are mandated for narrow boat owners to carry on the boats. Would it not be possible to insist that all persons on board wear such safety equipment before they are allowed into the tunnel? ”
Source location
Michael Holgate · 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
Continue encouraging boaters to wear lifejackets or buoyancy aids, particularly in tunnels.

Verbatim wording from the response
“2. Wearing of lifejackets or buoyancy aids There is no mandatory requirement that lifejackets or buoyancy aids must be worn or carried on inland waterway vessels. The Trust does encourage their use on inland waterways, but the general view of many inland waterway boaters is that lifejackets or buoyancy aids are unnecessary, but this is an attitude that the Trust is trying to change. The Trust will continue to encourage boaters to wear them in the interests of their general safety whilst boating, and we will make particular reference to safety in tunnels. In direct response to this tragedy we will be encouraging the wearing of lifejackets at Harecastle Tunnel by means of the briefing given to boaters and their crew prior to tunnel entry.”

Source location
2014-0357-Response-by-Canal-River-Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 4 August 2014
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
Modify tunnel portal signs across the network to recommend wearing lifejackets.

Verbatim wording from the response
“As the majority of tunnels are unattended by Trust staff we will modify all existing tunnel portal signs to include a clear recommendation to wear lifejackets. Additionally we will conduct an education campaign using our communication channels with boaters, about benefits of wearing of lifejackets/buoyancy aids. Although part of a continuous campaign we will complete this initial work by the 31st March 2015 which is the start of the main boating season.”

Source location
2014-0357-Response-by-Canal-River-Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 4 August 2014
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 an education campaign through boater communication channels about lifejacket and buoyancy-aid benefits.

Verbatim wording from the response
“As the majority of tunnels are unattended by Trust staff we will modify all existing tunnel portal signs to include a clear recommendation to wear lifejackets. Additionally we will conduct an education campaign using our communication channels with boaters, about benefits of wearing of lifejackets/buoyancy aids. Although part of a continuous campaign we will complete this initial work by the 31st March 2015 which is the start of the main boating season.”

Source location
2014-0357-Response-by-Canal-River-Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 4 August 2014
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
Modify the Harecastle Tunnel briefing to emphasise lifejackets and explain temperature changes inside the tunnel.

Verbatim wording from the response
“4. Review of safety information given out The Harecastle tunnel briefing has been further modified to make clear the importance of wearing lifejackets particularly for the helmsman. Additional information about change of temperature in the tunnel is being included in the briefing as this has been identified as a particular risk of which boaters should be aware. These changes have been made.”

Source location
2014-0357-Response-by-Canal-River-Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 4 August 2014
Open published response