PFD report

Peter Ramsden · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 8 Jul 2025•East Riding and Hull

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
1

Raised in this report

Recipients
2

Named on the report

Responses found
2

Of 2 recipients

Stated actions
1

Described in responses

Recipients and published 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.

Concerns raised1

  1. Lack of emergency powers of entry for ambulance and fire services
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable emergency forced-entry arrangements
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.1

  1. Action

    Engage Department of Health and Social Care counterparts about ambulance personnel access rights.

    Stated by Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local GovernmentStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 19 September 2025.

Respondent positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when it does not describe a specific action.3

  1. Position

    Fire and rescue authorities cannot use PACE entry powers but possess independent statutory emergency entry powers under the Fire and Rescue Services Act 2004.

    Stated by Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local GovernmentDisputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.

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 emergency powers of entry for ambulance and fire services

Wider context from the report

“Evidence was heard that there is a lacuna in the law, specifically relating to section 17 of the Police & Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) which grants police officers the power to enter and search premises without a warrant in specific situations. These include, inter alia, entry for arrest and emergency situations which allows entry to save life or limb or prevent serious damage to a property. In this particular case, evidence was heard that this man had not been seen for two months and there were concerns about his welfare and paramedics attended on one occasion but have no powers of entry. Due to the Right Care, Right Person model, which has been developed over the last few years, the police did not get involved, as it was thought by the concerned individual that this man not being seen was due to a medical problem. Evidence was heard which suggested that on occasions, the ambulance service and the fire service should have powers of entry in the event that a person who is ill, unconscious or otherwise incapacitated, with a remediable disorder, can receive prompt and potentially life-saving treatment. In this case, causation would not have been established as the man has been dead for several weeks, but situations could and will arise where time-sensitive pathological processes require emergency treatment to save life. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable emergency forced-entry arrangements.

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

Engage Department of Health and Social Care counterparts about ambulance personnel access rights.

Verbatim wording from the response

“CONCLUSION We appreciate the very sad circumstances of the passing of Mr. Ramsden. Whilst in the opinion of the NFCC and FRAs, a statutory framework exists for FRAs to support the public in tragic situations like Mr. Ramsden’s, the NFCC suggests there is an argument for an extension of powers to ambulance services as it would improve speed of response and reduce the burden on FRAs. I am copying this letter to the Secretary of State at the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) to be aware of the comments concerning rights of access for ambulance personnel; I have also asked my officials to engage with their counterparts at DHSC on this topic.”

Source location

Response from Housing, communities and Local Government
Page 2 · response
Published 19 September 2025

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

Fire and rescue authorities cannot use PACE entry powers but possess independent statutory emergency entry powers under the Fire and Rescue Services Act 2004.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Concerning the legal position, Fire and Rescue Authorities (FRAs), the legal body overseeing fire and rescue services, cannot lawfully operate under section 17 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act. However, they do possess independent statutory powers of entry under section 44 of the Fire and Rescue Services Act 2004. In the event of an emergency, section 44(1)(c) and 44(2)(a) of the Act allows authorised FRA personnel to enter premises (by force if necessary) without the consent of the owner or occupier of the premises or place, if they reasonably believe entry is needed to protect life or property. Section 58(a) of the Act defines an ‘emergency’ as an event or situation likely to cause death, serious injury, or serious illness.”

Source location

Response from Housing, communities and Local Government
Page 1 · response
Published 19 September 2025

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

Ambulance and Fire and Rescue services’ powers of entry fall outside the Home Office’s remit.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Your letter raises issues around powers of entry for Ambulance services and Fire and Rescue services. I believe my officials had previously contacted your office to alert you that this is not within the remit of the Home Office but rather the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (lead on fire services) and Department for Health and Social Care (lead on paramedics). My officials have brought these matters to the attention of relevant colleagues from those departments.”

Source location

Response from Home Office
Page 2 · response
Published 19 September 2025

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

Ambulance and Fire and Rescue services’ powers of entry are matters for the responsible health and fire departments.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Your letter raises issues around powers of entry for Ambulance services and Fire and Rescue services. I believe my officials had previously contacted your office to alert you that this is not within the remit of the Home Office but rather the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (lead on fire services) and Department for Health and Social Care (lead on paramedics). My officials have brought these matters to the attention of relevant colleagues from those departments.”

Source location

Response from Home Office
Page 2 · response
Published 19 September 2025

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

    Chief Constables retain responsibility for decisions about how police resources are deployed.

    Stated by Home OfficeRedirects responsibilityThe respondent said that another organisation was responsible for deciding or taking action.

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

Chief Constables retain responsibility for decisions about how police resources are deployed.

Verbatim wording from the response

“This is why partnership working is important, to ensure partners are clear on each of their roles and responsibilities to prevent anyone slipping through the gaps which sadly appears to have happened here. Further, RCRP sets a threshold that forces can use to determine if they shall deploy resource, but it does not undermine the independence of Chief Constables and their decisions on how to deploy their resource.”

Source location

Response from Home Office
Page 1 · response
Published 19 September 2025

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

Data last updated 7 September 2026