PFD report

Adam Albert John Forrester · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 11 Aug 2021•Stoke-on-Trent and North Staffordshire

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
3

Raised in this report

Recipients
2

Named on the report

Responses found
2

Of 2 recipients

Stated actions
2

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 raised3

  1. Single crewing of the bin collection vehicle
  2. Failure of the supervision advice document to include checks for persons inside bins
  3. Bin collection during darkness and poor weather in areas vulnerable to vagrants
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.2

  1. Action

    Review existing guidance and control measures for risks associated with people sleeping in or around bins.

    Stated by Health and Safety Executive and Waste and Recycling Health and Safety forum (WISHStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 12 August 2021.
  2. Action

    Draft clearer WISH INFO 3 wording requiring crews to check all large, four-wheeled bins.

    Stated by Health and Safety Executive and Waste and Recycling Health and Safety forum (WISHStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 12 August 2021.

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

  1. Position

    Existing guidance and control measures are broadly sufficient and proportionate to the risk, although wording for checking large bins could be clearer.

    Stated by Health and Safety Executive and Waste and Recycling Health and Safety forum (WISHExisting arrangements considered sufficientThe respondent said that existing arrangements were sufficient, so no further action was needed.

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

Single crewing of the bin collection vehicle

Wider context from the report

“(1)The bin waggon had collected bins during the hours of darkness in apparently poor weather conditions and from an area vulnerable to vagrants. The vehicle was single crewed. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

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

Failure of the supervision advice document to include checks for persons inside bins

Wider context from the report

“(2)The WISH document, Effective Proactive Monitoring in Waste and Recycling Collection Activities document contains a checklist on page 5 of 8 and a section headed Public Safety at points numbered 20-22. This section makes no mention of kicking bins or checking inside for persons. This is dealt with in the WISH Guidance Document –managing Access to Large Waste and Recycling Bins but not in the supervision advice document. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

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

Bin collection during darkness and poor weather in areas vulnerable to vagrants

Wider context from the report

“(1)The bin waggon had collected bins during the hours of darkness in apparently poor weather conditions and from an area vulnerable to vagrants. The vehicle was single crewed. ”

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

Review existing guidance and control measures for risks associated with people sleeping in or around bins.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Having reviewed the guidance, we are content that the existing material and control measures are broadly sufficient and proportionate to the risk. However, we recognise the wording of WISH INFO 3 could be clearer – so we have drafted some modified text at line 13 on page 5 of INFO13 and with the addition of line 21 on page 6: “Crew check all large, four wheeled bins” (to distinguish from the smaller two wheeled domestic types).”

Source location

2021-0268-Response-from-HSE_Published
Page 2 · response
Published 12 August 2021

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

Draft clearer WISH INFO 3 wording requiring crews to check all large, four-wheeled bins.

Verbatim wording from the response

“I refer to your report of 11th August 2021 which has been passed to me for response as head of HSE’s Waste and Recycling sector team. I have also consulted the Waste Industry Safety and Health forum (WISH) steering group who have many years of experience in the industry to clarify some of the issues. We have worked jointly to amend the guidance, ensure that it is fit for purpose and is as clear as it can be as to the risks and potential control measures. To save duplication, HSE has agreed with WISH that this letter should be regarded as a joint, composite response on behalf of both organisations. I trust this is acceptable.”

Source location

2021-0268-Response-from-HSE_Published
Page 1 · response
Published 12 August 2021

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

Existing guidance and control measures are broadly sufficient and proportionate to the risk, although wording for checking large bins could be clearer.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Having reviewed the guidance, we are content that the existing material and control measures are broadly sufficient and proportionate to the risk. However, we recognise the wording of WISH INFO 3 could be clearer – so we have drafted some modified text at line 13 on page 5 of INFO13 and with the addition of line 21 on page 6: “Crew check all large, four wheeled bins” (to distinguish from the smaller two wheeled domestic types).”

Source location

2021-0268-Response-from-HSE_Published
Page 2 · response
Published 12 August 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