Recipient

Mundesley Medical Centre

Pin Request correction

First report 1 May 2014•Latest report 1 May 2014

Recipient record

Reports, concerns and published responses

Health and care · Healthcare site. 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
2

Across all linked responses

Stated actions
6

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
6stated actions described

Topic comparisons are not available in the current evidence snapshot.

Concerns and recipient responses

Statements from Mundesley Medical Centre linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. Norfolk

    AI-generated summary

    DARREN LEE ARNOUP · 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

    Darren Arnoup was found hanging in the garage of his home on 27 October 2013 and was declared deceased at the scene. The report raises concern that correspondence containing information about a patient's suicide risk or self-harming behaviour might not be brought to a GP's attention, because it may be treated as information-only correspondence and filed without medical review.

    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 Mundesley Medical Centre; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to ensure that correspondence concerning a patient’s suicide risk or self-harming behaviour is noted

    Wider context from the report

    “In the light of that evidence I am concerned that there is a continuing risk that letters containing information about a concern for the suicide risk or self-harming behaviour of a patient will not be noted. Whilst it is not known whether in the case before me had the GP noted the content of the letter the tragic outcome would have been different I can readily envisage situations where it could. I am therefore concerned that guidelines operated by GP practices/surgeries, including the Mundesley Medical Centre may need to be reviewed to ensure that in future correspondence which refers to a concern for the suicide risk or self-harming behaviour of a patient is required to a Doctor/GP so that the Doctor/GP is aware of the concern. ”
    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 Mundesley Medical Centre; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure of GP practice guidelines to require referral of correspondence concerning a patient’s suicide risk or self-harming behaviour to a doctor or GP

    Wider context from the report

    “In the light of that evidence I am concerned that there is a continuing risk that letters containing information about a concern for the suicide risk or self-harming behaviour of a patient will not be noted. Whilst it is not known whether in the case before me had the GP noted the content of the letter the tragic outcome would have been different I can readily envisage situations where it could. I am therefore concerned that guidelines operated by GP practices/surgeries, including the Mundesley Medical Centre may need to be reviewed to ensure that in future correspondence which refers to a concern for the suicide risk or self-harming behaviour of a patient is required to a Doctor/GP so that the Doctor/GP is aware of the concern. ”
    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
50%17%33%
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