9 Oct 2025 Leo Alexander Barber · Prevention of Future Deaths report South London
View report summary
Concerns raised 2 Accessibility of potentially harmful online material to vulnerable individuals in mental health crisis View source Failure of the coronial investigative process to obtain evidence from out-of-jurisdiction online service providers View source
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
×
AI-generated summary
Leo Alexander Barber · 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
Leo Alexander Barber, aged 16, died by suicide on 28 November 2023 after stepping in front of a train. The report states that exposure to an online forum discussing methods of suicide probably reinforced his decision to end his life. Concerns include vulnerable people, including children, accessing potentially harmful online material and difficulties obtaining online activity data from service providers outside the jurisdiction of England and Wales.
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. The report was sent to Google UK Limited; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Accessibility of potentially harmful online material to vulnerable individuals in mental health crisis
Wider context from the report “(1) A 16-year-old child in severe mental health crisis was able to access online material which reinforced his decision to end his life. He registered on the ████████ site using his Gmail address and accessed the material on his Android OS ‘phone. I am concerned that there is a risk of future deaths among those in mental health crisis including children while such material is accessible to vulnerable individuals online .
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Google UK Limited; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure of the coronial investigative process to obtain evidence from out-of-jurisdiction online service providers
Wider context from the report “(2) In the course of my investigation, I issued a Schedule 5 notice to Ofcom to exercise its power under Section 101 of the Online Safety Act 2023 to obtain evidence from Google relating to Leo’s online activity before his death. No material was provided by Google under this procedure. I understand that Google’s position is that the service provider holding such data (Google LLC) is not within the jurisdiction of England and Wales but is within the US jurisdiction and subject to the laws of the USA which prohibit compliance with my Schedule 5 notice under the Section 101 process. I express no view either way on any legal issue as to conflict of laws. As I noted, but for the happenstance that Leo’s parents were able to provide the police with Leo’s believed usernames and passwords, my investigation would have been frustrated and incomplete in respect of a matter of grave concern. The risk that future coronial investigations might be so frustrated does itself give rise to the risk of future deaths , in that coronial investigations cumulatively mitigate the risk of such deaths. I am therefore concerned that there is a risk of future deaths where vulnerable individuals in England and Wales may access potentially harmful online material from a service provider not within the jurisdiction of England and Wales (as opposed to a service provider within the jurisdiction of England and Wales which would be subject to the Section 101 coronial investigative process).
” 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 Apply specialised ranking approaches to suicide and self-harm queries.
Verbatim wording from the response “In relation to suicide and self-harm content, Google Search takes a combination of approaches, including:” Source location Response from Google
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 Comply with Online Safety Act obligations through risk assessment, Search moderation and related safety measures.
Verbatim wording from the response “In relation to suicide and self-harm content, Google Search takes a combination of approaches, including:” Source location Response from Google
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 Maintain Search content policies prohibiting content that could directly facilitate serious and immediate harm.
Verbatim wording from the response “In relation to suicide and self-harm content, Google Search takes a combination of approaches, including:” Source location Response from Google
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 Lock SafeSearch and apply a UK-specific filter for known children to remove harmful content from results.
Verbatim wording from the response “In relation to suicide and self-harm content, Google Search takes a combination of approaches, including:” Source location Response from Google
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 Provide suicide and self-harm support information through hotline OneBoxes.
Verbatim wording from the response “In relation to suicide and self-harm content, Google Search takes a combination of approaches, including:” Source location Response from Google
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 Engage with Ofcom and the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology on access to information relevant to inquests and bereaved representatives.
Verbatim wording from the response “We recognise the value of coroners such as yourself having access to information that is relevant to an inquest. We also recognise the importance of having fair and compassionate policies in place to ensure that parents and appropriate representatives have access to information connected to the death of a loved one. We are engaging actively with Ofcom and the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology on these issues.” Source location Response from Google
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 Google cannot provide the requested stored content because US law prohibits production absent limited exceptions not applicable here.
Verbatim wording from the response “As communicated to Ofcom, the entity providing Google services to users based in the UK is typically Google LLC, a US company incorporated in Delaware. User data is therefore controlled by Google LLC and subject to US laws, including the US Federal Stored Communications Act (the “SCA”). As you may be aware, we informed Ofcom that we would not be able to comply with any formal notice, if one had been issued, to provide this information because the SCA prohibits the production of stored content absent limited exceptions, which were not considered to apply in this case.” Source location Response from Google
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 website provider, not Google, determines who may register and access the hosted material.
Verbatim wording from the response “We hope this information is helpful although, for clarity, we note that your Report does not suggest that Mr Barber encountered the Site through search results on Google Search. In addition, while your Report indicates that Mr Barber opened an account on the Site using his Gmail address, it is the provider of the Site alone that determines who can sign up to the Site and access the material it hosts.” Source location Response from Google
Open published response
23 Aug 2024 Amal Mohamed AHMED · Prevention of Future Deaths report Milton Keynes
View report summary
Concerns raised 5 Inadequate positioning and visibility of No Entry signage for wrong-way slip-road entry View source Frequent wrong-way driving down the slip road into oncoming traffic View source Slip-road geometry allowing wrong-way vehicles to enter and build up considerable speed View source Failure to maintain adequate visibility of road-surface No Entry markings at the slip-road junction View source Failure of commonly used satnav applications to provide unambiguous verbal directions at the junction View source See 2 more concerns
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
×
AI-generated summary
Amal Mohamed AHMED · 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
Amal Mohamed Ahmed died at the scene after entering the A5 southbound off slip road in the wrong direction and colliding head-on with another vehicle. The other vehicle’s driver later died in hospital, and a passenger suffered life-threatening injuries. The principal concern was that inadequate, poorly positioned and poorly visible signage and the unlit, wide junction allowed drivers to enter the slip road incorrectly; other drivers were observed making the same manoeuvre.
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. The report was sent to Google UK Limited; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Inadequate positioning and visibility of No Entry signage for wrong-way slip-road entry
Wider context from the report “The exit point of the A5 "off" slip road at the Little Brickhill junction is wide. The signage indicating No Entry appears to be inadequate as there are two No Entry signs which are widely spaced at the junction. One is positioned to appear to forbid entry to the road over the bridge leading over the A5 and does not obviously relate to the slip road. The second is positioned such that it obliquely faces the road over the bridge and would not be visible to a driver turning right onto the slip road until they had completed the manoeuvre placing them at risk. There is a No Right Turn sign as the junction is approached. There is also No Entry in large white letters at the mouth of the slip road junction, however, this may be (1) obscured by vehicles leaving the slip road and (2) the junction is unlit and was said by a witness as being "pitch black". After the collision attention police officers saw three further vehicles perform exactly the same manoeuvre as Ms Ahmed and attempt to travel down the slip road in the wrong direction. Local residents have contacted police and claimed that it is a very common occurrence for drivers to mistakenly travel down the slip road in the wrong direction. The slip road is long and allows for the build up of considerable speed in turn facilitating what the police describe as a high energy impact. Following the collision, large temporary No Entry signs were positioned at the slip road junction. They were quickly removed apparently because the original signs were deemed to comply with necessary regulations. That seems wholly irrelevant to me because drivers are clearly commonly not seeing the signs because of the large numbers who mistakenly drive the wrong way onto the slip road. In my opinion, consideration should be given to alternative arrangements to prevent vehicles entering and travelling along the slip road in the wrong direction.
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Google UK Limited; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Frequent wrong-way driving down the slip road into oncoming traffic
Wider context from the report “I have made observations regarding the slip road at this junction in my initial pre-Inquest Report To Prevent Future Deaths dated the 21st December 2023.
National Highways undertook a number of immediate remedial measures to try to prevent drivers turning and travelling the wrong way down this slip road, including narrowing the "mouth" of the slip road to one lane, placement of very large temporary "No Entry" signs and placement of signs indicating "Do Not Use Satnav" at the site. CCTV monitoring of driver behaviour was commenced. Police activity and monitoring by National Highways showed that despite these measures, drivers were still turning early and attempting to drive the wrong way down the slip road . Further enquiries by the police and information volunteered by members of the public who made the same incorrect manoeuvre led to the finding that while the visual map display on commonly used satnav applications at this junction displayed the correct information, the verbal commands gave information likely to confuse and direct drivers down the wrong slip road into the path of oncoming traffic . This was observed to happen frequently.
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Google UK Limited; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Slip-road geometry allowing wrong-way vehicles to enter and build up considerable speed
Wider context from the report “The exit point of the A5 "off" slip road at the Little Brickhill junction is wide. The signage indicating No Entry appears to be inadequate as there are two No Entry signs which are widely spaced at the junction. One is positioned to appear to forbid entry to the road over the bridge leading over the A5 and does not obviously relate to the slip road. The second is positioned such that it obliquely faces the road over the bridge and would not be visible to a driver turning right onto the slip road until they had completed the manoeuvre placing them at risk. There is a No Right Turn sign as the junction is approached. There is also No Entry in large white letters at the mouth of the slip road junction, however, this may be (1) obscured by vehicles leaving the slip road and (2) the junction is unlit and was said by a witness as being "pitch black". After the collision attention police officers saw three further vehicles perform exactly the same manoeuvre as Ms Ahmed and attempt to travel down the slip road in the wrong direction. Local residents have contacted police and claimed that it is a very common occurrence for drivers to mistakenly travel down the slip road in the wrong direction. The slip road is long and allows for the build up of considerable speed in turn facilitating what the police describe as a high energy impact. Following the collision, large temporary No Entry signs were positioned at the slip road junction. They were quickly removed apparently because the original signs were deemed to comply with necessary regulations. That seems wholly irrelevant to me because drivers are clearly commonly not seeing the signs because of the large numbers who mistakenly drive the wrong way onto the slip road. In my opinion, consideration should be given to alternative arrangements to prevent vehicles entering and travelling along the slip road in the wrong direction.
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Google UK Limited; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure to maintain adequate visibility of road-surface No Entry markings at the slip-road junction
Wider context from the report “The exit point of the A5 "off" slip road at the Little Brickhill junction is wide. The signage indicating No Entry appears to be inadequate as there are two No Entry signs which are widely spaced at the junction. One is positioned to appear to forbid entry to the road over the bridge leading over the A5 and does not obviously relate to the slip road. The second is positioned such that it obliquely faces the road over the bridge and would not be visible to a driver turning right onto the slip road until they had completed the manoeuvre placing them at risk. There is a No Right Turn sign as the junction is approached. There is also No Entry in large white letters at the mouth of the slip road junction, however, this may be (1) obscured by vehicles leaving the slip road and (2) the junction is unlit and was said by a witness as being "pitch black". After the collision attention police officers saw three further vehicles perform exactly the same manoeuvre as Ms Ahmed and attempt to travel down the slip road in the wrong direction. Local residents have contacted police and claimed that it is a very common occurrence for drivers to mistakenly travel down the slip road in the wrong direction. The slip road is long and allows for the build up of considerable speed in turn facilitating what the police describe as a high energy impact. Following the collision, large temporary No Entry signs were positioned at the slip road junction. They were quickly removed apparently because the original signs were deemed to comply with necessary regulations. That seems wholly irrelevant to me because drivers are clearly commonly not seeing the signs because of the large numbers who mistakenly drive the wrong way onto the slip road. In my opinion, consideration should be given to alternative arrangements to prevent vehicles entering and travelling along the slip road in the wrong direction.
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Google UK Limited; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure of commonly used satnav applications to provide unambiguous verbal directions at the junction
Wider context from the report “I have made observations regarding the slip road at this junction in my initial pre-Inquest Report To Prevent Future Deaths dated the 21st December 2023.
National Highways undertook a number of immediate remedial measures to try to prevent drivers turning and travelling the wrong way down this slip road, including narrowing the "mouth" of the slip road to one lane, placement of very large temporary "No Entry" signs and placement of signs indicating "Do Not Use Satnav" at the site. CCTV monitoring of driver behaviour was commenced. Police activity and monitoring by National Highways showed that despite these measures, drivers were still turning early and attempting to drive the wrong way down the slip road. Further enquiries by the police and information volunteered by members of the public who made the same incorrect manoeuvre led to the finding that while the visual map display on commonly used satnav applications at this junction displayed the correct information, the verbal commands gave information likely to confuse and direct drivers down the wrong slip road into the path of oncoming traffic . This was observed to happen frequently.
” 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 Investigate and develop improvements to the timing of Google Maps audio guidance.
Verbatim wording from the response “• We have liaised with National Highways and reviewed their helpful dashcam footage of the relevant junction. This has assisted our product and engineering teams in carefully investigating the audio guidance provided by Google Maps. Our teams are working on improvements to the timing of the audio guidance.” Source location Response from Google
Open published response
22 Aug 2024 Tracey Julie HAYBITTLE · Prevention of Future Deaths report Milton Keynes
View report summary
Concerns raised 2 Failure of commonly used satnav applications to provide safe verbal directions at the junction View source Frequent wrong-way driving on the slip road View source
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
×
AI-generated summary
Tracey Julie HAYBITTLE · 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
Tracey Julie Haybittle died at the John Radcliffe Hospital after a head-on collision when another driver entered the wrong slip road at the Little Brickhill junction. The report raised concerns that verbal commands from commonly used satnav applications could confuse and direct drivers down the wrong slip road into oncoming traffic, and that this occurred frequently despite remedial measures.
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. The report was sent to Google UK Limited; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure of commonly used satnav applications to provide safe verbal directions at the junction
Wider context from the report “I have made observations regarding the slip road at this junction in my initial pre-Inquest Report To Prevent Future Deaths dated the 21st December 2023 in respect of the linked case of Amal Mohamed Ahmood.
National Highways undertook a number of immediate remedial measures to try to prevent drivers turning and travelling the wrong way down this slip road, including narrowing the "mouth" of the slip road to one lane, placement of very large temporary "No Entry" signs and placement of signs indicating "Do Not Use Satnav" at the site. CCTV monitoring of driver behaviour was commenced. Police activity and monitoring by National Highways showed that despite these measures, drivers were still turning early and attempting to drive the wrong way down the slip road. Further enquiries by the police and information volunteered by members of the public who made the same incorrect manoeuvre led to the finding that while the visual map display on commonly used satnav applications at this junction displayed the correct information, the verbal commands gave information likely to confuse and direct drivers down the wrong slip road into the path of oncoming traffic . This was observed to happen frequently.
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Google UK Limited; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Frequent wrong-way driving on the slip road
Wider context from the report “I have made observations regarding the slip road at this junction in my initial pre-Inquest Report To Prevent Future Deaths dated the 21st December 2023 in respect of the linked case of Amal Mohamed Ahmood.
National Highways undertook a number of immediate remedial measures to try to prevent drivers turning and travelling the wrong way down this slip road, including narrowing the "mouth" of the slip road to one lane, placement of very large temporary "No Entry" signs and placement of signs indicating "Do Not Use Satnav" at the site. CCTV monitoring of driver behaviour was commenced. Police activity and monitoring by National Highways showed that despite these measures, drivers were still turning early and attempting to drive the wrong way down the slip road . Further enquiries by the police and information volunteered by members of the public who made the same incorrect manoeuvre led to the finding that while the visual map display on commonly used satnav applications at this junction displayed the correct information, the verbal commands gave information likely to confuse and direct drivers down the wrong slip road into the path of oncoming traffic. This was observed to happen frequently .
” 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 Liaised with National Highways and reviewed dashcam footage of the junction to inform investigation of Google Maps audio guidance.
Verbatim wording from the response “• We have liaised with National Highways and reviewed their helpful dashcam footage of the relevant junction. This has assisted our product and engineering teams in carefully investigating the audio guidance provided by Google Maps. Our teams are working on improvements to the timing of the audio guidance.” Source location Response from Google
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 Investigate and develop improvements to the timing of Google Maps audio guidance.
Verbatim wording from the response “• We have liaised with National Highways and reviewed their helpful dashcam footage of the relevant junction. This has assisted our product and engineering teams in carefully investigating the audio guidance provided by Google Maps. Our teams are working on improvements to the timing of the audio guidance.” Source location Response from Google
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 It is not clear whether Google Maps was involved in the incidents described in the reports.
Verbatim wording from the response “We recognise that the cases identified in the reports are tragic. While it is not clear whether Google Maps was involved, we have carefully considered whether there are improvements we can make to Google Maps to help ensure that similar incidents do not occur in future. We have therefore taken the following measures:” Source location Response from Google
Open published response
19 Dec 2023 Chloe Elizabeth MACDERMOTT · Prevention of Future Deaths report Inner West London
View report summary
Concerns raised 6 Lack of prominent signposting to organisations providing suicide-prevention help View source Internet availability and delivery of an unspecified item to individual users in the UK View source Open chatrooms permitting the exchange of information and methods that encourage, assist, counsel or procure suicide View source Failure of effective border and customs controls for delivery of an unspecified item to UK users View source Lack of age or other access restrictions for children, vulnerable teenagers and vulnerable adults View source Failure to effectively remove posts containing details of suicide methods View source See 3 more concerns
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
×
AI-generated summary
Chloe Elizabeth MACDERMOTT · 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
Chloe Elizabeth MACDERMOTT died at home in the early hours of 23 May 2021 after ingesting a substance purchased through Amazon US. The report identifies concerns about online forums encouraging, assisting and counselling suicide, inadequate age restrictions and signposting to help, harmful content not being effectively removed, and the availability and delivery of the product to UK users without effective border or customs controls.
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. The report was sent to Google UK Limited; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Lack of prominent signposting to organisations providing suicide-prevention help
Wider context from the report “(6) No prominent signposting is in place to organisations from whom help is available to prevent suicide .
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Google UK Limited; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Internet availability and delivery of an unspecified item to individual users in the UK
Wider context from the report “(9) The availability of ████████ through the internet and its delivery to individual users in the UK with a non-commercial or agricultural use.
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Google UK Limited; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Open chatrooms permitting the exchange of information and methods that encourage, assist, counsel or procure suicide
Wider context from the report “(3) ████████ is a forum that permits material to be exchanged and reviewed within its open chatrooms whereby suicide is encouraged, assisted, counselled and procured through the provision and exchange of information and methods .
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Google UK Limited; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure of effective border and customs controls for delivery of an unspecified item to UK users
Wider context from the report “(10) The ability for UK users to purchase ████████ through Amazon in the United States and to take delivery in the United Kingdom without effective border and/or custom controls .
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Google UK Limited; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Lack of age or other access restrictions for children, vulnerable teenagers and vulnerable adults
Wider context from the report “(5) No age or other restrictions are in place to prevent access to children, vulnerable teenagers and vulnerable adults .
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Google UK Limited; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure to effectively remove posts containing details of suicide methods
Wider context from the report “(7) Posts are made by users containing details of methods of suicide without any effective administration to remove such harmful content .
” 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 suicide-related Search information boxes with the Samaritans, linking users to authoritative support and helplines.
Verbatim wording from the response “• As a further measure to support both vulnerable users and the organisations they turn to for help, Google Search has taken proactive steps by working with the Samaritans to implement “OneBoxes” which display prominently in response to suicide-related queries. These information boxes are designed to provide users with quick and easy access to authoritative resources and support for mental health needs, including a 24 hour helpline and links to the Samaritans’ official website. We also note that when users search specifically for the Site, our systems will surface this Samaritans OneBox, with a phone number for national hotlines.” Source location Response from Google
Open published response
Pin
Request correction
Information checked against published PFD reports and official responses · Data reviewed 7 Sep 2026 · About data quality and limitations