Recipient

South Wales Fire and Rescue Service

Pin Request correction

First report 16 Jun 2017•Latest report 16 Jun 2017

Recipient record

Reports, concerns and published responses

Local government · Fire and rescue service. 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
100%

Found for named reports

Concerns addressed
2

Across all linked responses

Stated actions
2

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.

100%published responses found
2stated actions described

Topic comparisons are not available in the current evidence snapshot.

Concerns and recipient responses

Statements from South Wales Fire and Rescue Service linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. South Wales Central

    AI-generated summary

    Russell William Sherwood · 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

    Russell William Sherwood was found deceased in his vehicle after it was swept into flood water on New Inn Road, Bridgend. The concerns related to the Fire Service leaving the scene while flooding continued to pose a risk to life, without closing the road or leaving warning signs, and to limitations in equipment and protocols for road closures.

    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 South Wales Fire and Rescue Service; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of equipment for closing highways

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) The evidence revealed that having rescued a motorist from flooding, at a time when the flooding continued to pose a risk to life, the Fire Service Unit departed the scene before the Highways authority arrived and without closing the road or leaving any warning signs. (2) The evidence further revealed that South Wales Fire and Rescue Service Units do not carry equipment to close highways and they only carry enough equipment to make a road safe when dealing with an incident. Furthermore, it was stated in evidence that the Fire Service rely on the Highways authority or the Police to carry out road closures and Fire Service protocols do not permit the closure of roads. ”
    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 South Wales Fire and Rescue Service; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to maintain road safety while flooding continues to pose a risk to life

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) The evidence revealed that having rescued a motorist from flooding, at a time when the flooding continued to pose a risk to life, the Fire Service Unit departed the scene before the Highways authority arrived and without closing the road or leaving any warning signs. (2) The evidence further revealed that South Wales Fire and Rescue Service Units do not carry equipment to close highways and they only carry enough equipment to make a road safe when dealing with an incident. Furthermore, it was stated in evidence that the Fire Service rely on the Highways authority or the Police to carry out road closures and Fire Service protocols do not permit the closure of roads. ”
    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 South Wales Fire and Rescue Service; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure of Fire Service arrangements to enable road closure

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) The evidence revealed that having rescued a motorist from flooding, at a time when the flooding continued to pose a risk to life, the Fire Service Unit departed the scene before the Highways authority arrived and without closing the road or leaving any warning signs. (2) The evidence further revealed that South Wales Fire and Rescue Service Units do not carry equipment to close highways and they only carry enough equipment to make a road safe when dealing with an incident. Furthermore, it was stated in evidence that the Fire Service rely on the Highways authority or the Police to carry out road closures and Fire Service protocols do not permit the closure of roads. ”
    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

    Conduct a comprehensive review of operating procedures, including consideration of the coroner’s recommendations and flooding and inland water emergency response arrangements.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We are pleased to confirm that your recommendations for action ("your Recommendations"), as set out at paragraph 6 on page 2 of your Report, are currently being considered by the Service as part of its overarching response to the Fire and Rescue Services (Emergencies) (Wales) (Amendment) Order 2017 ("the Order"). For your information, the Order creates a new statutory duty for Fire and Rescue Authorities to make provision from 1 April 2017 for responding to flooding and inland water emergencies which present a risk of death, serious injury or serious illness to people.”

    Source location

    2017-0192-Response-by-South-Wales-Fire-and-Rescue-Services
    Page 1 · response
    Published 9 August 2017

    Open published response
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

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

How actions were described at the time

This respondent
50%50%
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