Recipient

West Yorkshire Combined Authority

Pin Request correction

First report 3 Mar 2022•Latest report 3 Mar 2022

Recipient record

Reports, concerns and published responses

Policing · Mayoral policing 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 West Yorkshire Combined Authority 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

    Andrew David Kitson · 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

    Andrew David Kitson was walking on the pavement of the A61 Leeds Road on 9 June 2020 when a Peugeot being pursued by police lost control, mounted the pavement and struck him. He sustained multiple injuries and was pronounced dead at the scene. The concerns related to insufficient statistical evidence for evaluating spontaneous police pursuits and the burden placed on police personnel when assessing the safety of continuing high-speed pursuits in residential areas.

    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 West Yorkshire Combined Authority; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Insufficiently refined parameters and guidance for spontaneous police pursuits in residential areas

    Wider context from the report

    “(2) The rules governing spontaneous police pursuits in residential areas place an onerous burden upon police standards review continuously the safety of proceeding whilst at the same time driving at high speed. The pursuit manager who authorises the continuance of a pursuit is dependant upon fragments of verbal messages relayed over the radio, due to the perceived need to leave airtime for other TPAC units to input information. The Inquest heard evidence to the effect that real time camera pictures from the police vehicle are not always available due to IT issues. This means the pursuit manager must largely trust the judgement of the police driver. In order to lessen the burden upon the police driver in having to weigh numerous factors in a continuing, complex judgement, consideration should be given to a refinement of the parameters in which pursuits in residential areas are permitted. Such guidance to pursuit managers (informed by data regarding the effectiveness and risks arising in previous pursuits) would help to promote consistency and lessen the dependence upon a case-by-case judgement made in a pressured timescale. ”
    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 West Yorkshire Combined Authority; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of statistical evidence and analytical feedback for evaluating the risks and effectiveness of spontaneous police pursuits

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) The evidence taken at the inquest revealed insufficient statistical evidence was available to guide an evaluation of the proportion of spontaneous police pursuits which (a) involve driving at high speeds through residential areas; (b) result in the apprehension of an offender; (c) result in personal injury to other road users or property damage; (d) are aborted without the alleged offender being caught; without such analytical feedback (ideally prepared on a national basis) the risks inherent in such pursuits, balanced against their effectiveness, cannot adequately be reviewed. ”
    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 West Yorkshire Combined Authority; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Unreliable availability of complete real-time information to pursuit managers

    Wider context from the report

    “(2) The rules governing spontaneous police pursuits in residential areas place an onerous burden upon police standards review continuously the safety of proceeding whilst at the same time driving at high speed. The pursuit manager who authorises the continuance of a pursuit is dependant upon fragments of verbal messages relayed over the radio, due to the perceived need to leave airtime for other TPAC units to input information. The Inquest heard evidence to the effect that real time camera pictures from the police vehicle are not always available due to IT issues. This means the pursuit manager must largely trust the judgement of the police driver. In order to lessen the burden upon the police driver in having to weigh numerous factors in a continuing, complex judgement, consideration should be given to a refinement of the parameters in which pursuits in residential areas are permitted. Such guidance to pursuit managers (informed by data regarding the effectiveness and risks arising in previous pursuits) would help to promote consistency and lessen the dependence upon a case-by-case judgement made in a pressured timescale. ”
    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