Mr Christopher Brookes · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 22 Feb 2017•Black Country

Published report and response evidence

This report’s concerns and statements found in recipients’ published responses. Statements are included even where no link to an individual concern is recorded. A link shows an evidence connection; it does not assign responsibility.

View original report
Concerns
2

Raised in this report

Recipients
3

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 3 recipients

Stated actions
4

Described in responses

Recipients and published responses

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 raised2

  1. Risk of falling to the road below at the location
  2. Failure of security guards to attend alarms indicating unauthorised use of the fire exit
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable security alarms for detecting insecure exits and access

Stated actions An action is something a recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to a concern raised.4

  1. Wolverhampton City Council

    Inspect and maintain the fire-escape gate, including its push-pad mechanism.

  2. Wolverhampton City Council

    Work with the combined authority and building users to address fire-escape safety.

  3. Wolverhampton City Council

    Install additional safety lighting and warning signage along the fire-escape route.

  4. Wolverhampton City Council

    Review the index area with the health and safety executive and fire service.

Respondent positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when it does not describe a specific action.2

  1. Wolverhampton City Council

    Responsibility for operating the bus station, including its fire escape door and security services, rests with the combined transport executive.

    Redirects responsibilityThe respondent said that another organisation was responsible for deciding or taking action.
  2. Wolverhampton City Council

    The Council lacks control over the bus station fire escape door and the security arrangements for the relevant area.

    Outside remitThe respondent said that this matter was outside its role or authority.

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

Risk of falling to the road below at the location

Wider context from the report

“1. Evidence emerged during the inquest that there was a previous incident at the same location involving a member of public who narrowly escaped falling to the road below in April 2017 in similar circumstances. ”

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 security guards to attend alarms indicating unauthorised use of the fire exit

Wider context from the report

“2. Evidence also emerged during the inquest that an alarm would be activated if the fire exit was used. It appears that security guards employed to deal with unauthorised use of the fire exit failed to attend. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable security alarms for detecting insecure exits and access.

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

Inspect and maintain the fire-escape gate, including its push-pad mechanism.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Following the incident occurring, the Council has liaised closely with the fire safety authority. The health and safety executive has confirmed that the height and construction of the fencing along the fire escape route is appropriate and meets the relevant regulations. The gate itself has been inspected and maintained, including the push pad mechanism. As you are aware from the Inquest, there is no locking mechanism of similar placed on the gate at the relevant time.”

Source location

2018-0055-Response-by-City-of-Wolverhampton
Page 2 · response
Published 8 June 2018

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

Work with the combined authority and building users to address fire-escape safety.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In addition to the above, the Council has installed additional safety lighting on the fire escape route, together with signage, highlighting the existence of a drop below the fire escape route. The Council has also committed to working with the other relevant parties, including the combined authority and the other users of the building, to include Sainsburys supermarket, who occupy and are of the ground floor of the building.”

Source location

2018-0055-Response-by-City-of-Wolverhampton
Page 2 · response
Published 8 June 2018

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

Install additional safety lighting and warning signage along the fire-escape route.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In addition to the above, the Council has installed additional safety lighting on the fire escape route, together with signage, highlighting the existence of a drop below the fire escape route. The Council has also committed to working with the other relevant parties, including the combined authority and the other users of the building, to include Sainsburys supermarket, who occupy and are of the ground floor of the building.”

Source location

2018-0055-Response-by-City-of-Wolverhampton
Page 2 · response
Published 8 June 2018

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

Review the index area with the health and safety executive and fire service.

Verbatim wording from the response

“With regard to section 6 of your report, I confirm that following Mr Brookes’ sad death, the Council has worked with both the health and safety executive and the fire service, to review the index area. As you may be aware, the Council has no control over the fire escape from”

Source location

2018-0055-Response-by-City-of-Wolverhampton
Page 1 · response
Published 8 June 2018

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

Responsibility for operating the bus station, including its fire escape door and security services, rests with the combined transport executive.

Verbatim wording from the response

“2. With regard to the alarm being activated, as you may be aware from the evidence given at the Inquest itself, the fire escape door from the bus station is not something under the control or operation of City of Wolverhampton Council. The combined transport executive has responsibility for and control over the bus station operation, including the fire escape door from the bus station itself. In addition, the security services contracted to deal with that element of the operations is something entirely under the control and responsibility of the combined transport executive. The Council has no control over the provision of security for the relevant area.”

Source location

2018-0055-Response-by-City-of-Wolverhampton
Page 1 · response
Published 8 June 2018

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

The Council lacks control over the bus station fire escape door and the security arrangements for the relevant area.

Verbatim wording from the response

“2. With regard to the alarm being activated, as you may be aware from the evidence given at the Inquest itself, the fire escape door from the bus station is not something under the control or operation of City of Wolverhampton Council. The combined transport executive has responsibility for and control over the bus station operation, including the fire escape door from the bus station itself. In addition, the security services contracted to deal with that element of the operations is something entirely under the control and responsibility of the combined transport executive. The Council has no control over the provision of security for the relevant area.”

Source location

2018-0055-Response-by-City-of-Wolverhampton
Page 1 · response
Published 8 June 2018

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