Recipient

HM Revenue & Customs

Pin Request correction

First report 24 Nov 2022•Latest report 24 Nov 2022

Recipient record

Reports, concerns and published responses

Central government · Non-ministerial department. This page brings together reports naming this recipient and response statements clearly connected to concerns raised in those reports.

Reports
1

Naming this recipient

Published responses
0%

Found for named reports

Concerns addressed
0

Across all linked responses

Stated actions
0

Described in responses

Reports over time

Reports over time

Reports naming this recipient by issue year.

Evidence profile

Report topics

Share of this recipient’s reports compared with all other recipients.

0%published responses found
0stated actions described

Topic comparisons are not available in the current evidence snapshot.

Concerns and recipient responses

Statements from HM Revenue & Customs linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. North Yorkshire and York

    AI-generated summary

    Keith Andrew WESTON · 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

    Keith Andrew WESTON was found in the garden of his home on 9 March 2022 after shooting himself with a licensed firearm. The principal concern was that prosecutions by non-police authorities did not automatically trigger checks of the Police National Computer, meaning firearms licensing authorities might not be alerted to assess a person's continuing suitability to possess firearms.

    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 HM Revenue & Customs; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure of the HMRC investigator to respond to firearms licensing contact about the concern

    Wider context from the report

    “During the course of the inquest, evidence was heard from a Detective Inspector with North Yorkshire Police who is a Firearms Licensing Manager. The evidence was that, unlike standard police prosecutions, prosecutions of individuals by other authorities do not involve automatic checks of the Police National Computer which would flag whether that individual is licensed to possess a firearm. The appearance of such an alert allows the firearms licensing authority to assess the individual’s continuing suitability to possess a firearm in the context of the prosecution and its possible outcomes. In this instance, the deceased was being prosecuted for tax fraud by HMRC and was due to make a court appearance on the day of his death. He left a note of intent, indicating that the prosecution and its likely outcome were central to his decision to end his life. Had it been flagged that the deceased was facing such a prosecution, I was informed that it was 'highly likely' that his access to licensed firearms would have been restricted and the weapons removed from him in accordance with statutory guidance. While it cannot be said that this would have prevented the deceased's death by his own hand from some other means, it would have prevented the unlawful discharge of the weapon as a means of suicide. I understand that this issue has been escalated to the NPCC Lead for firearms licensing with a view to highlighting the concern with all non-police prosecuting authorities. I also understand the HMRC investigator did not respond to the officer's contact with the agency to flag this issue. I am writing to HMRC to draw this concern to its attention and to invite it to respond directly, as well as to engage with the NPCC in this regard. ”
    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 HM Revenue & Customs; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of automatic Police National Computer checks for non-police prosecutions to identify licensed firearm holders

    Wider context from the report

    “During the course of the inquest, evidence was heard from a Detective Inspector with North Yorkshire Police who is a Firearms Licensing Manager. The evidence was that, unlike standard police prosecutions, prosecutions of individuals by other authorities do not involve automatic checks of the Police National Computer which would flag whether that individual is licensed to possess a firearm. The appearance of such an alert allows the firearms licensing authority to assess the individual’s continuing suitability to possess a firearm in the context of the prosecution and its possible outcomes. In this instance, the deceased was being prosecuted for tax fraud by HMRC and was due to make a court appearance on the day of his death. He left a note of intent, indicating that the prosecution and its likely outcome were central to his decision to end his life. Had it been flagged that the deceased was facing such a prosecution, I was informed that it was 'highly likely' that his access to licensed firearms would have been restricted and the weapons removed from him in accordance with statutory guidance. While it cannot be said that this would have prevented the deceased's death by his own hand from some other means, it would have prevented the unlawful discharge of the weapon as a means of suicide. I understand that this issue has been escalated to the NPCC Lead for firearms licensing with a view to highlighting the concern with all non-police prosecuting authorities. I also understand the HMRC investigator did not respond to the officer's contact with the agency to flag this issue. I am writing to HMRC to draw this concern to its attention and to invite it to respond directly, as well as to engage with the NPCC in this regard. ”
    Open source report
Back to top

Published response patterns

Compared with other recipients in reports included in PFD Monitor

Describes published response evidence, not performance.

Published responses found

0%
0%All other recipients 58%
0%100%

How actions were described at the time

This respondent
All other recipients
47%25%27%<1%<1%
  • Completed
  • In progress
  • Planned
  • Unclear
  • Partially completed

Statuses reflect what recipients said at the time. PFD Monitor does not verify whether actions happened.

Types of action described in responses

Percentages use all actions described by each group. An action may have more than one type, so percentages do not total 100%.

Information checked against published PFD reports and official responses · Data reviewed 7 Sep 2026 · About data quality and limitations

Data last updated 7 September 2026