PFD report

Barry Martin · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 10 Sep 2021•Manchester South

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
1

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 1 recipient

Stated actions
0

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. Failure to check for alternative safe exit routes when boarding up occupied houses
    Part of recurring concern: Unsafe emergency egress arrangements
Responses linked to these concerns

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

Respondent positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when it does not describe a specific action.1

  1. Position

    The property had rear-door access and issued keys, with no evidence the tenant lacked a key or access when the front door was boarded.

    Stated by Jigsaw GroupDisputes 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

Failure to check for alternative safe exit routes when boarding up occupied houses

Wider context from the report

“After concerns were raised for his welfare, Mr Martin’s front door to his house was boarded up following a forced entry by Greater Manchester Police on 10th December 2020. There were no other exit routes from the property as there was no key available to Mr Martin to be able to use the rear door being the only other door. I am concerned that if occupied houses have to be boarded up that proper checks are made that there are other alternative safe exit routes for residents. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unsafe emergency egress arrangements.

Open source report

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

The property had rear-door access and issued keys, with no evidence the tenant lacked a key or access when the front door was boarded.

Verbatim wording from the response

“However, when our technician attended on this occasion, he was approached by a neighbour who confirmed that the tenant had been taken to hospital so was not in occupation at the time of the board up. Our technician noted that the property had rear door access and was therefore satisfied that the tenant had alternative access to the property.”

Source location

Response from Jigsaw Homes Tameside
Page 1 · response
Published 17 September 2021

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