Recipient

National Tree Safety Group

Pin Request correction

First report 12 Jul 2017•Latest report 12 Jul 2017

Recipient record

Reports, concerns and published responses

Private and voluntary organisations · Standards body. 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 National Tree Safety Group linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. West Yorkshire Eastern

    AI-generated summary

    Elaine Edith Davison · 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

    Elaine Edith Davison was fatally injured when part of a tree fell onto the car in which she was travelling as a passenger during a storm on 11 November 2010. The principal concern was that the tree had visible defects and longstanding decay that should have led to closer inspection and urgent felling, but its condition was not identified before it fell.

    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 National Tree Safety Group; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to distinguish Polyporus Squamosus from Phytophthora Pseudomonas or bleeding canker

    Wider context from the report

    “(2) Post incident the tree was examined by an expert Arboriculturist who determined that the tree was severely decayed at 8.5 metres in height with insufficient sound timber at this point to support the weight of the tree. The decay was caused by a fungal infection Polyporus Squamosus. The decay was longstanding and progressive. The decay was hidden from sight, but the tree contained visible defects worthy of closer inspection, which would have led to the discovery of this condition, and a recommendation for it to be felled as a matter of urgency. (3) I am informed that your view is that the risk of people being killed by falling trees is extremely low. In fact one in ten million, but you recognise the duty of holders who are required to take reasonable steps to minimise the risk. Notwithstanding this I recommend that your organisation has a major influence nationally on tree safety, bring to the attention of those who are responsible for the upkeep and maintenance of trees, particularly in places frequented and used by the public, and for trees that are abut and overhang a highway, when such a tree or trees are recognised as having fault or disease, that such trees are automatically examined and tested for Polyporus Squamosus and if such a disease is identified then the tree should be recommended for felling. (4) It is apparent that the condition Polyporus Squamosus may well be mistaken for the more common condition Phytophthora Pseudomonas or bleeding canker, and the urgency of felling might not be considered. ”
    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 National Tree Safety Group; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to recognise the urgency of felling trees affected by Polyporus Squamosus

    Wider context from the report

    “(2) Post incident the tree was examined by an expert Arboriculturist who determined that the tree was severely decayed at 8.5 metres in height with insufficient sound timber at this point to support the weight of the tree. The decay was caused by a fungal infection Polyporus Squamosus. The decay was longstanding and progressive. The decay was hidden from sight, but the tree contained visible defects worthy of closer inspection, which would have led to the discovery of this condition, and a recommendation for it to be felled as a matter of urgency. (3) I am informed that your view is that the risk of people being killed by falling trees is extremely low. In fact one in ten million, but you recognise the duty of holders who are required to take reasonable steps to minimise the risk. Notwithstanding this I recommend that your organisation has a major influence nationally on tree safety, bring to the attention of those who are responsible for the upkeep and maintenance of trees, particularly in places frequented and used by the public, and for trees that are abut and overhang a highway, when such a tree or trees are recognised as having fault or disease, that such trees are automatically examined and tested for Polyporus Squamosus and if such a disease is identified then the tree should be recommended for felling. (4) It is apparent that the condition Polyporus Squamosus may well be mistaken for the more common condition Phytophthora Pseudomonas or bleeding canker, and the urgency of felling might not be considered. ”
    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 National Tree Safety Group; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to undertake sufficiently thorough examination and testing of trees with visible defects or recognized fault or disease for Polyporus Squamosus

    Wider context from the report

    “(2) Post incident the tree was examined by an expert Arboriculturist who determined that the tree was severely decayed at 8.5 metres in height with insufficient sound timber at this point to support the weight of the tree. The decay was caused by a fungal infection Polyporus Squamosus. The decay was longstanding and progressive. The decay was hidden from sight, but the tree contained visible defects worthy of closer inspection, which would have led to the discovery of this condition, and a recommendation for it to be felled as a matter of urgency. (3) I am informed that your view is that the risk of people being killed by falling trees is extremely low. In fact one in ten million, but you recognise the duty of holders who are required to take reasonable steps to minimise the risk. Notwithstanding this I recommend that your organisation has a major influence nationally on tree safety, bring to the attention of those who are responsible for the upkeep and maintenance of trees, particularly in places frequented and used by the public, and for trees that are abut and overhang a highway, when such a tree or trees are recognised as having fault or disease, that such trees are automatically examined and tested for Polyporus Squamosus and if such a disease is identified then the tree should be recommended for felling. (4) It is apparent that the condition Polyporus Squamosus may well be mistaken for the more common condition Phytophthora Pseudomonas or bleeding canker, and the urgency of felling might not be considered. ”
    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