PFD report

Terrence Roy Hubert Taylor · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 21 Jun 2024•Cambridgeshire and Peterborough

Report record

Published report and response evidence

This page connects the concerns raised in this report with statements found in recipients’ published responses. A link shows a clear evidence connection; it does not assign responsibility.

View original report
Concerns
2

Raised in this report

Recipients
3

Named on the report

Responses found
3

Of 3 recipients

Stated actions
12

Described in responses

Source document

Full report text

This is the full text from the original published report.

Open published report

Concerns and recipient responses

Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

Report evidence summary

Concerns raised2

  1. Failure of window restrictor standards to address deliberate attempts to defeat restrictors
    Part of recurring concern: Inadequate window fall-prevention controls in residential accommodation
  2. Lack of reliable, up-to-date guidance on the limitations of window restrictor standards
Responses linked to these concerns

Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.

Actions described in response An action is something a recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to a concern raised.12

  1. Action

    Publish provider bulletin content highlighting the deliberate bypass risk and directing providers to the window-restrictor safety guidance.

    Stated by Care Quality CommissionStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 27 June 2024.
  2. Action

    Publish and maintain web guidance on window restrictors, including links to relevant HSE guidance and safety incident learning.

    Stated by Care Quality CommissionStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 27 June 2024.
  3. Action

    Update the website publication to reflect NHS England guidance that British Standards do not address deliberate impact-force attempts to defeat window restrictors.

    Stated by Care Quality CommissionStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 27 June 2024.

Respondent positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when it does not describe a specific action.4

  1. Position

    Updates to British safety guidance on window restrictors depend on the Health and Safety Executive or British Standards Institution.

    Stated by Care Quality CommissionRedirects responsibilityThe respondent said that another organisation was responsible for deciding or taking action.

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Failure of window restrictor standards to address deliberate attempts to defeat restrictors

Wider context from the report

“1. The concern relates to the guidance provided to operators of residential care homes in respect of window restrictors and the standard they are required to meet. The current standards have been developed to prevent accidental falling from windows. They do not deal with deliberate attempts to defeat the restrictor, which may well be the situation encountered residential care homes, as in fact occurred in this case. This limitation is not known or understood by operators of residential care homes. 2. In December 2013 the Department of Health published Health Building Note 00-10 Part D: Windows and associated hardware. That guidance was not directed to residential care home provides. The Guidance was updated following an earlier Coroner’s report to prevent future deaths addressed to the Chief Medical Officer. That Guidance Note provides that “... window restrictors tested to current British Standards may be inadequate in preventing a determined effort to force a window open beyond 100mm ...”. It also noted that: “... The relevant tests for restrictors cited in BS EN 14351-1 and BS EN 13126-5 have been developed to prevent accidental falling from windows ... None of the British and European Standards deal with deliberate attempts to defeat the restrictor using impact forces, which may be the situation encountered in hospitals and care homes”. 3. The evidence was that this Guidance was not generally known or understood by operators of residential care homes or manufactures or suppliers of window restrictors. 4. In 2019 the Health and Safety Executive published Research Report RR1150 Review of Window Restrictors use in Health and Social Care. The outcome of that research was that in order to protect vulnerable people in health and social care premises: “... it is suggested that window restrictors (and their fixings) are capable of withstanding push forces of at least 850N ...”. 5. Thus the HSE’s research suggests that window restrictors in health and social care premises should be able to withstand forces very much greater than that of the British Standards. 6. The evidence was that this research was not generally known or understood by operators of residential care homes or manufactures or suppliers of window restrictors. 7. Operators of care homes are likely to consider they are taking reasonable steps to secure windows by fitting restrictors that meet the British Standards, whereas the 2013 Department of Health Guidance and the 2019 Health and Safety Executive research indicates that is not so. 8. Action is required to ensure operators of care homes are provided with reliable, up to date guidance and to ensure that the limitations of the British Standard are widely known and understood by operators of residential care homes. 9. Action is required to review the British Standard relating to window restrictors to consider whether some different standard or qualification to the existing standard is required in respect of residential care homes and/or deliberate acts to disable window restrictors. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Inadequate window fall-prevention controls in residential accommodation.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Lack of reliable, up-to-date guidance on the limitations of window restrictor standards

Wider context from the report

“1. The concern relates to the guidance provided to operators of residential care homes in respect of window restrictors and the standard they are required to meet. The current standards have been developed to prevent accidental falling from windows. They do not deal with deliberate attempts to defeat the restrictor, which may well be the situation encountered residential care homes, as in fact occurred in this case. This limitation is not known or understood by operators of residential care homes. 2. In December 2013 the Department of Health published Health Building Note 00-10 Part D: Windows and associated hardware. That guidance was not directed to residential care home provides. The Guidance was updated following an earlier Coroner’s report to prevent future deaths addressed to the Chief Medical Officer. That Guidance Note provides that “... window restrictors tested to current British Standards may be inadequate in preventing a determined effort to force a window open beyond 100mm ...”. It also noted that: “... The relevant tests for restrictors cited in BS EN 14351-1 and BS EN 13126-5 have been developed to prevent accidental falling from windows ... None of the British and European Standards deal with deliberate attempts to defeat the restrictor using impact forces, which may be the situation encountered in hospitals and care homes”. 3. The evidence was that this Guidance was not generally known or understood by operators of residential care homes or manufactures or suppliers of window restrictors. 4. In 2019 the Health and Safety Executive published Research Report RR1150 Review of Window Restrictors use in Health and Social Care. The outcome of that research was that in order to protect vulnerable people in health and social care premises: “... it is suggested that window restrictors (and their fixings) are capable of withstanding push forces of at least 850N ...”. 5. Thus the HSE’s research suggests that window restrictors in health and social care premises should be able to withstand forces very much greater than that of the British Standards. 6. The evidence was that this research was not generally known or understood by operators of residential care homes or manufactures or suppliers of window restrictors. 7. Operators of care homes are likely to consider they are taking reasonable steps to secure windows by fitting restrictors that meet the British Standards, whereas the 2013 Department of Health Guidance and the 2019 Health and Safety Executive research indicates that is not so. 8. Action is required to ensure operators of care homes are provided with reliable, up to date guidance and to ensure that the limitations of the British Standard are widely known and understood by operators of residential care homes. 9. Action is required to review the British Standard relating to window restrictors to consider whether some different standard or qualification to the existing standard is required in respect of residential care homes and/or deliberate acts to disable window restrictors. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

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

Publish provider bulletin content highlighting the deliberate bypass risk and directing providers to the window-restrictor safety guidance.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In August 2024 we published a note in our bulletin to providers (a regular update for providers and professionals working in adult social care) highlighting the tragic loss of life following a deliberate attempt to bypass a window restrictor and to remind providers of the CQC’s ‘Learning From Safety Incidents’ webpage. This publication has been updated on the CQC website to reflect the Health Building Note published”

Source location

Response from CQC
Page 2 · response
Published 27 June 2024

Open published response

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

Publish and maintain web guidance on window restrictors, including links to relevant HSE guidance and safety incident learning.

Verbatim wording from the response

“It sets out control measures that may be taken by care homes to ensure that people are kept safe. In 2022, CQC published a ‘Learning From Safety Incidents’ page on our website on the use of window restrictors. This can be found, alongside relevant, up to date guidance on complying with the relevant health and safety precautions, here: www.cqc.org.uk/guidance-providers/learning-safety-incidents/issue-7-falls-windows. This webpage also has links to the latest HSE guidance on risks to vulnerable members of the public from falling from height from windows; www.hse.gov.uk/safetybulletins/windowrestrictors.htm.”

Source location

Response from CQC
Page 2 · response
Published 27 June 2024

Open published response

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

Update the website publication to reflect NHS England guidance that British Standards do not address deliberate impact-force attempts to defeat window restrictors.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In August 2024 we published a note in our bulletin to providers (a regular update for providers and professionals working in adult social care) highlighting the tragic loss of life following a deliberate attempt to bypass a window restrictor and to remind providers of the CQC’s ‘Learning From Safety Incidents’ webpage. This publication has been updated on the CQC website to reflect the Health Building Note published”

Source location

Response from CQC
Page 2 · response
Published 27 June 2024

Open published response

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

Supplement existing signposting with guidance tailored to specific sectors and service types.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We are currently undertaking work to improve how we signpost providers to sources of good practice, to support our Single Assessment Framework. Good practice that is applicable across all sectors is already available, and we signpost to the HSE 2012 information sheet on Falls from windows or balconies in health and social care under the Quality Statement on ‘safe environments’, under the Safe key question. In time this will be supplemented by guidance that is applicable to specific sectors (such as ASC or health), or to specific service types (such as care home).”

Source location

Response from CQC
Page 3 · response
Published 27 June 2024

Open published response

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

Improve signposting to sources of good practice through the Single Assessment Framework.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We are currently undertaking work to improve how we signpost providers to sources of good practice, to support our Single Assessment Framework. Good practice that is applicable across all sectors is already available, and we signpost to the HSE 2012 information sheet on Falls from windows or balconies in health and social care under the Quality Statement on ‘safe environments’, under the Safe key question. In time this will be supplemented by guidance that is applicable to specific sectors (such as ASC or health), or to specific service types (such as care home).”

Source location

Response from CQC
Page 3 · response
Published 27 June 2024

Open published response

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

Contact the Health and Safety Executive about reviewing the British Standard for window restrictors.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In response to your second request for action, reviewing the British Standard is not within the scope of my Department's responsibilities. However, my officials have contacted HSE on this matter and await their reply.”

Source location

Response from DHSC
Page 2 · response
Published 27 June 2024

Open published response

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

Amend BS 6375-2 clause 5.3 to cover windows used in circumstances described by the Coroner’s report.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Amendments to BS 6375-2”

Source location

Response from BSI
Page 5 · response
Published 27 June 2024

Open published response

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

Discuss with CEN/TC 33 WG1 whether EN 14609 needs amendment to address restricted sliding sash windows.

Verbatim wording from the response

“BS EN 14609, is referred to by BS EN 14351-1 as the test method to determine the load bearing capacity of safety devices, but it only covers casement windows not sash windows, clause 7 calls for the restrictors to be disengaged and figures A.1 to A.6 show the movement of the casement to be limited by a “block” stopping the movement of one corner. We will discuss the possible need to amend EN 14609”

Source location

Response from BSI
Page 7 · response
Published 27 June 2024

Open published response

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

Introduce a BS 6375-2 annex specifying the test method for restricted sliding sash windows.

Verbatim wording from the response

“As BS EN 14609 does not cover loads applied to restricted sliding sash windows we will need to introduce a new annex to BS 6375-2 describing the test method to be used for such windows.”

Source location

Response from BSI
Page 6 · response
Published 27 June 2024

Open published response

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

Amend BS 6510 clause 12.2 to refer to BS 6375-2 clause 5.3 rather than the existing fixed load and duration.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Steel-framed windows”

Source location

Response from BSI
Page 6 · response
Published 27 June 2024

Open published response

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

Require glazing to withstand the 850 N point load and meet specified impact-resistance grades.

Verbatim wording from the response

“If loads are to be applied to the casement or sash then it will be necessary to upgrade the glazing so it can withstand comparable loads. We therefore propose that the glazing should be able to support the 850 N point load (applied via the pad) but also be grade 1(B)1 or 1(C)1 when tested in accordance with BS EN 12600. This will reduce the risk of egress being achieved by breaking the glass.”

Source location

Response from BSI
Page 6 · response
Published 27 June 2024

Open published response

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

Check whether the proposed BS 6375-2 amendment conflicts with existing European standards.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The load bearing capacity of safety devices is an essential characteristic of windows (reference Table ZA.1) therefore, when such a device is fitted to a window the loadbearing capacity of the window, when tested in accordance with BS EN 14609, must be stated on the manufacturer’s declaration of performance in accordance with article 4 (2) of the assimilated EU Regulation 305/2011 (The Construction Products Regulation).”

Source location

Response from BSI
Page 7 · response
Published 27 June 2024

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent position was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Updates to British safety guidance on window restrictors depend on the Health and Safety Executive or British Standards Institution.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Whilst the CQC will publish and expect providers and registered managers to be aware of, and follow, best practice when it comes to British safety standards, the CQC relies upon guidance issued. If either HSE or The British Standards Institution update their guidance around window restrictors, the CQC will take steps to ensure providers are signposted to it both through our website and published bulletins to providers.”

Source location

Response from CQC
Page 3 · response
Published 27 June 2024

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent position was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Reviewing the British Standard for window restrictors is outside the Department’s responsibilities.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In response to your second request for action, reviewing the British Standard is not within the scope of my Department's responsibilities. However, my officials have contacted HSE on this matter and await their reply.”

Source location

Response from DHSC
Page 2 · response
Published 27 June 2024

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent position was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

CQC will address raising awareness of current window-restrictor guidance among residential care home operators.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In response to your first request, CQC are a named responder to this case. CQC’s separate response will address concerns related to raising awareness amongst residential care home operators of the latest guidance on window restrictors.”

Source location

Response from DHSC
Page 2 · response
Published 27 June 2024

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent position was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

National requirements for window safety products are for the country where the products are used to establish.

Verbatim wording from the response

“BS EN 14351-1, the European product standard for windows and external pedestrian doors, doesn’t, as appears in for example the HSE report RR1150, limit the load bearing capacity of a safety device to 350 N but instead sets 350 N as the minimum, or threshold, value for such devices. It would be for the EU member state, or country in which the product is used, to set the national requirements for such products.”

Source location

Response from BSI
Page 7 · response
Published 27 June 2024

Open published response

Other statements in published responses

These actions and other statements could not be clearly connected to one concern in this report.

Recipient positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when they do not describe a specific action.1

  1. 1

    Passing the report to responsible expert committees under BSI’s usual process is considered sufficient compliance with the requested actions.

    Stated by British Standards InstitutionExisting arrangements considered sufficientThe respondent said that existing arrangements were sufficient, so no further action was needed.

Source evidence

How this respondent position was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Passing the report to responsible expert committees under BSI’s usual process is considered sufficient compliance with the requested actions.

Verbatim wording from the response

“4. In accordance with its usual practice, BSI passed the Report to the responsible expert committees, who have replied as detailed below. We believe that constitutes compliance with the required actions, but would be pleased to assist if the coroner has any further questions.”

Source location

Response from BSI
Page 2 · response
Published 27 June 2024

Open published response
Back to top

Information checked against the published report and official responses · Data reviewed 7 Sep 2026 · About data quality and limitations

Official responses located
3/3

Data last updated 7 September 2026