Southampton City Council

Local government · English unitary authority

Pin Request correction

First report 21 Feb 2019•Latest report 5 Aug 2024

Reports, concerns and published responses

Reports over time

Reports naming this recipient by issue year.

* 2026 is projected from reports observed to 7 Sep 2026.

Reports
3

Naming this recipient

Published responses
0%

Found for named reports

Concerns addressed
0

Across all linked responses

Stated actions
0

Described in responses

Concerns and recipient responses

Statements from Southampton City Council linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. Hampshire, Southampton and Portsmouth

    AI-generated summary

    Janet Karen HARRISON · 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

    Janet Karen HARRISON was found beneath her neighbour’s collapsed wall during Storm Eunice on 18 February 2022 and suffered catastrophic injuries. After hospital admissions and treatment for multiple complications, she died in hospital on 31 August 2022 from hospital-acquired pneumonia. The concern was that other nearby walls had similarly unsafe dimensions and could collapse in future storms of similar force, placing others at risk of death.

    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 Southampton City Council; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Unsafe dimensions of walls in adjoining properties creating a collapse risk during severe storms

    Wider context from the report

    “I heard evidence from ████████ the owner of the property adjoining that of Janet Karen HARRISON whose wall collapsed on 18 February 2022, ████████ the occupier and neighbour of Janet Karen HARRISON and the family of Janet Karen HARRISON who were all confirmed to me in evidence that there are a number of adjoining properties in the area which have walls built with the same unsafe dimensions as the one that collapsed on to Janet Karen HARRISON during Storm Eunice. I am therefore concerned that if there were other storms in the UK of similar force to that of Storm Eunice then there is a risk of further walls in the local area collapsing thereby placing others at risk of future deaths. ”
    Open source report

  2. Hampshire (Central)

    AI-generated summary

    Adam Wilcox · 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

    Adam Wilcox was struck by a motorcycle while crossing the A27 Mansbridge Road on 7 March 2019 and died in hospital from his injuries. The report raised concerns that this stretch of road had no safe pedestrian or cycle crossing, no warnings to motorists, and that pedestrians and cyclists were likely to cross where the footpath ended and barriers began. It also identified the road as busy and noted previous collisions, including incidents involving pedestrians.

    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 Southampton City Council; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to warn motorists of pedestrian and cyclist crossings on the A27 Mansbridge Road

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) The A27 Mansbridge Road at the stretch of carriageway from well before the White Swan pub to beyond the scene of this incident (as far as Gaters Hill) does not provide any form of (safe) pedestrian or cycle crossing or any warnings to motorists that pedestrians or cyclist are crossing along its length. (2) For pedestrians walking (or cyclists not on the carriageway heading) east on the southern side, the only option to travel beyond the scene of this incident is on the northern side of the A27 carriageway. As such, anyone who has not sought to cross the carriageway at a much earlier juncture is either forced to retrace their steps to find another point to cross or (as is more likely) to attempt to cross the carriageway once the path way runs out, where it tapers and stops at the metal barriers and at its junction with the Itchen Navigation. In either event, neither pedestrians nor cyclists have a defined or safe means by which to cross the carriageway and no warnings are given to motorists that they may do so. (3) The A27 Mansbridge Road is a busy, popular and major thoroughfare, running east-west and south of and parallel to the M27. As such it presents an increased risk to pedestrians and cyclists alike. (4) I am advised by the Roads Policing Unit that during their visit to the scene (in the conduct of the forensic examination for this inquest) they themselves saw several pedestrians and cyclists crossing the road, at either end, often climbing the metal barrier where the pavement ended. (5) I am advised that in the past 5 years there have been 15 collisions on the A27 between Itchen Side Close and Allington Lane, of which 5 were classed as serious collisions and 10 classed as slight, with 11 occurring within daylight hours. 2 specific incidents (excluding this fatality) involved pedestrians being struck by vehicles. ”
    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 Southampton City Council; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of a safe pedestrian and cycle crossing on the A27 Mansbridge Road

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) The A27 Mansbridge Road at the stretch of carriageway from well before the White Swan pub to beyond the scene of this incident (as far as Gaters Hill) does not provide any form of (safe) pedestrian or cycle crossing or any warnings to motorists that pedestrians or cyclist are crossing along its length. (2) For pedestrians walking (or cyclists not on the carriageway heading) east on the southern side, the only option to travel beyond the scene of this incident is on the northern side of the A27 carriageway. As such, anyone who has not sought to cross the carriageway at a much earlier juncture is either forced to retrace their steps to find another point to cross or (as is more likely) to attempt to cross the carriageway once the path way runs out, where it tapers and stops at the metal barriers and at its junction with the Itchen Navigation. In either event, neither pedestrians nor cyclists have a defined or safe means by which to cross the carriageway and no warnings are given to motorists that they may do so. (3) The A27 Mansbridge Road is a busy, popular and major thoroughfare, running east-west and south of and parallel to the M27. As such it presents an increased risk to pedestrians and cyclists alike. (4) I am advised by the Roads Policing Unit that during their visit to the scene (in the conduct of the forensic examination for this inquest) they themselves saw several pedestrians and cyclists crossing the road, at either end, often climbing the metal barrier where the pavement ended. (5) I am advised that in the past 5 years there have been 15 collisions on the A27 between Itchen Side Close and Allington Lane, of which 5 were classed as serious collisions and 10 classed as slight, with 11 occurring within daylight hours. 2 specific incidents (excluding this fatality) involved pedestrians being struck by vehicles. ”
    Open source report

  3. Southampton and New Forest

    AI-generated summary

    Jason Marshall GREGORY · 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

    Jason Gregory became involved in a disturbance and was physically restrained by door security staff, including by an arm hold around his neck. He suffered ventricular fibrillation and cardiac arrest, with contributory factors including exertion, excitement, cocaine and alcohol intoxication. The concerns were about delays in relaying serious incidents to police and uncertainty among security staff about how to request police assistance in time-critical situations.

    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 Southampton City Council; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to relay known emergencies or serious situations to police in a timely way

    Wider context from the report

    “I heard evidence that door security staff called Southampton Citywatch (Whisky 1) just after midnight on 6 May 2017 by radio reporting a serious disturbance and requesting urgent police attendance at the scene, but this was refused and were told that a call should be made to emergency services using the 999 service. I am concerned that if there is an emergency or serious situation in Southampton known to Citywatch staff by reason of their monitoring or reports received, this fact is not being relayed to Hampshire Police in a timely way and so there is a risk that there will be delays in police officers attending and members of the public are at risk of death or serious injury as a consequence. It is unclear to licence security staff how they should call for assistance from the police when dealing with time critical situations at busy times. ”
    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 Southampton City Council; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Unclear procedures for licence security staff calling police assistance in time-critical situations

    Wider context from the report

    “I heard evidence that door security staff called Southampton Citywatch (Whisky 1) just after midnight on 6 May 2017 by radio reporting a serious disturbance and requesting urgent police attendance at the scene, but this was refused and were told that a call should be made to emergency services using the 999 service. I am concerned that if there is an emergency or serious situation in Southampton known to Citywatch staff by reason of their monitoring or reports received, this fact is not being relayed to Hampshire Police in a timely way and so there is a risk that there will be delays in police officers attending and members of the public are at risk of death or serious injury as a consequence. It is unclear to licence security staff how they should call for assistance from the police when dealing with time critical situations at busy times. ”
    Open source report
Back to top

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