PFD report

Michael James Crane · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 25 Oct 2024•Inner North London

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
5

Raised in this report

Recipients
2

Named on the report

Responses found
2

Of 2 recipients

Stated actions
6

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 raised5

  1. Lack of clear staff procedures after a resident is found by police
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable missing-person response
  2. Failure to report an unexpectedly absent resident missing
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable missing-person response
  3. Lack of MPS guidance to frontline officers on people likely to be missing but not yet reported missing
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable missing-person response
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.4

  1. Action

    Develop and deliver a bespoke one-day mental-health training package based on policing guidance, legislation, service-user perspectives and scenario-based learning.

    Stated by Metropolitan Police ServiceStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 1 November 2024.
  2. Action

    Replace the Mental Health Toolkit with an interactive Mental Health SharePoint page containing policing and mental-health guidance and legislative links.

    Stated by Metropolitan Police ServiceStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 1 November 2024.
  3. Action

    Review the missing-person policy and wider policies and procedures to clarify when residents should be reported missing.

    Stated by Prime Life LimitedStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 1 November 2024.

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

  1. Position

    Even if reported missing, officers lacked further legal powers because he was an adult and section 136 criteria were unmet.

    Stated by Metropolitan Police ServiceUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant 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

Lack of clear staff procedures after a resident is found by police

Wider context from the report

“1) The registered manager of Island Place Residential Home gave evidence to the inquest, and her evidence revealed the following: • staff at the Home did not follow the Home’s own policy to report a resident missing once they have been unexpectedly absent for 24 hours; • staff seemed vague and confused about what, if anything, they should do once they became aware that the resident had been found by the police in London; • staff advised the police in London that they intended to report the resident missing but then did not proceed to do so; • details about any additional training or steps taken to reduce the risks were very vague; and • details of specific policies and procedures in place at the time were vague. 2) There was clear evidence from MPS officers that had the resident been reported missing, they could have done more to protect and safeguard the resident. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable missing-person response.

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 to report an unexpectedly absent resident missing

Wider context from the report

“1) The registered manager of Island Place Residential Home gave evidence to the inquest, and her evidence revealed the following: • staff at the Home did not follow the Home’s own policy to report a resident missing once they have been unexpectedly absent for 24 hours; • staff seemed vague and confused about what, if anything, they should do once they became aware that the resident had been found by the police in London; • staff advised the police in London that they intended to report the resident missing but then did not proceed to do so; • details about any additional training or steps taken to reduce the risks were very vague; and • details of specific policies and procedures in place at the time were vague. 2) There was clear evidence from MPS officers that had the resident been reported missing, they could have done more to protect and safeguard the resident. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable missing-person response.

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 MPS guidance to frontline officers on people likely to be missing but not yet reported missing

Wider context from the report

“1) The MPS constable who gave evidence at the inquest, told me that: • if Mr Crane had been reported missing at the time he was in Charing Cross police station then there would have been more that officers could have done to keep him safe; • the fact that officers had heard (directly from staff) that the Home intended to report Mr Crane missing within the next 30 minutes, did not mean that there was more that the officers could have done at the time; and • there was not, either at that time or to date, any MPS guidance to frontline officers in relation to how to approach their powers under section 136 of the Mental Health Act or in relation to people who are likely to be missing but have not yet been reported as such. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable missing-person response.

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 MPS guidance to frontline officers on approaching powers under section 136 of the Mental Health Act

Wider context from the report

“1) The MPS constable who gave evidence at the inquest, told me that: • if Mr Crane had been reported missing at the time he was in Charing Cross police station then there would have been more that officers could have done to keep him safe; • the fact that officers had heard (directly from staff) that the Home intended to report Mr Crane missing within the next 30 minutes, did not mean that there was more that the officers could have done at the time; and • there was not, either at that time or to date, any MPS guidance to frontline officers in relation to how to approach their powers under section 136 of the Mental Health Act or in relation to people who are likely to be missing but have not yet been reported as such. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unsafe operation of Section 136 mental health assessment and detention procedures.

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 clear specific policies and procedures

Wider context from the report

“1) The registered manager of Island Place Residential Home gave evidence to the inquest, and her evidence revealed the following: • staff at the Home did not follow the Home’s own policy to report a resident missing once they have been unexpectedly absent for 24 hours; • staff seemed vague and confused about what, if anything, they should do once they became aware that the resident had been found by the police in London; • staff advised the police in London that they intended to report the resident missing but then did not proceed to do so; • details about any additional training or steps taken to reduce the risks were very vague; and • details of specific policies and procedures in place at the time were vague. 2) There was clear evidence from MPS officers that had the resident been reported missing, they could have done more to protect and safeguard the resident. ”

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

Develop and deliver a bespoke one-day mental-health training package based on policing guidance, legislation, service-user perspectives and scenario-based learning.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In early 2019, the MPS reviewed the mental health training that was delivered to officers and developed a bespoke one-day training package. The content was based on the College of Policing Authorised Professional Practice (APP), the London Crisis Care Pathway and the MPS Mental Health Toolkit. It incorporated relevant legislation (including the Mental Health Act 1983) and the voice of the service user, lessons learnt; and tested learning through a series of animated scenarios. It encouraged officers to implement their learning as well as seeking to highlight the perspectives of service users and mental health professionals. This training was concluded in April 2020 and has been delivered to 10,300 officers.”

Source location

Response from Metropolitan Police Service
Page 2 · response
Published 1 November 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

Replace the Mental Health Toolkit with an interactive Mental Health SharePoint page containing policing and mental-health guidance and legislative links.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The MPS had a Mental Health Toolkit up to July 2024. This was a living document containing guidance for officers on how to deal with all aspects of people who are mentally unwell or have mental illness. This has now been superseded by the Mental Health SharePoint page which provides guidance and is also interactive. It contains sections on all topics of policing and mental health and has links to the associated legislation.”

Source location

Response from Metropolitan Police Service
Page 3 · response
Published 1 November 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

Review the missing-person policy and wider policies and procedures to clarify when residents should be reported missing.

Verbatim wording from the response

“There are a full set of policies and procedures available to all staff, which have since undergone a full review.”

Source location

Response from Prime Life
Page 3 · response
Published 1 November 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

Provide additional training to Island Place staff and managers on when and how quickly residents should be reported missing.

Verbatim wording from the response

“As a provider we are committed to learning lessons from incidents such as the tragic one with Michael, since this incident we have reviewed our missing person policy and have provided additional training to the staff and management at Island Place in order to ensure that they have clear guidance on when and understanding on how quickly a person should be reported missing.”

Source location

Response from Prime Life
Page 3 · response
Published 1 November 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

Even if reported missing, officers lacked further legal powers because he was an adult and section 136 criteria were unmet.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Even in the event that Mr Crane had been reported missing, the officers options were extremely limited. They had already formed the view that he did not meet the criteria for s136 MHA to be used and as Mr Crane was an adult, there were no other policing powers available to them. The care home were informed where Mr Crane was and provided no further details to the officers as to any risk Mr Crane may have posed to himself/others or any further details about his mental health that could have raised the risk to him.”

Source location

Response from Metropolitan Police Service
Page 4 · response
Published 1 November 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

No staff action was considered necessary after London police contact because the resident had capacity and was entitled to travel and leave the service.

Verbatim wording from the response

“There is a clear policy regarding what to do once they become aware of a missing resident, Michael had full capacity to travel wherever he wanted and therefore there was no action for the staff to take when they had contact from the police in London.”

Source location

Response from Prime Life
Page 2 · response
Published 1 November 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

The resident was not considered missing while his whereabouts were known through hospital and police contacts, so reporting was not considered necessary earlier.

Verbatim wording from the response

“At this point MC had been off unit 13.5 hours and was not reported missing because he was not missing, we knew he was at St Thomas’s hospital in London and therefore did not need to report him as a missing person. 16th January 11:55- MC was escorted by a member of the hospital staff for a cigarette however he left the hospital and was seen boarding a bus bound for Victoria station. 16th January 12:00- St Thomas hospital called Island Place and said MC had absconded from the hospital. 16th January 16:00- Senior at Island Place called St Thomas hospital to see if he had returned and he had not. 16th January 17:30- PC Cante from town croft police called to say they had approached MC in the street to a welfare check on him and they asked if he was under any section, police said MC expressed he wasn’t ready to return to Island Place and they didn’t have any hold over him.”

Source location

Response from Prime Life
Page 1 · response
Published 1 November 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-stated actions An action is something a recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to a concern raised.2

  1. 1

    Introduce the scenario-based vulnerable-person training approach into recruit Public and Personal Safety Training.

    Stated by Metropolitan Police ServiceStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 1 November 2024.
  2. 2

    Include a vulnerable-person scenario in annual scenario-based Public and Personal Safety Training refresher sessions.

    Stated by Metropolitan Police ServiceStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 1 November 2024.

Recipient positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when they do not describe a specific action.3

  1. 1

    Officers reasonably concluded that section 136 criteria were unmet; not using the power did not constitute inaction.

    Stated by Metropolitan Police ServiceDisputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.
  2. 2

    Mental health professionals or the care home were responsible for communicating any heightened risk across agency contacts.

    Stated by Metropolitan Police ServiceRedirects responsibilityThe respondent said that another organisation was responsible for deciding or taking action.
  3. 3

    The service was not considered duty-bound to extend support into the community after the resident chose to leave and travel to London.

    Stated by Prime Life LimitedOutside remitThe respondent said that this matter was outside its role or authority.

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 the scenario-based vulnerable-person training approach into recruit Public and Personal Safety Training.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Vulnerable person scenario”

Source location

Response from Metropolitan Police Service
Page 2 · response
Published 1 November 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

Include a vulnerable-person scenario in annual scenario-based Public and Personal Safety Training refresher sessions.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Vulnerable person scenario”

Source location

Response from Metropolitan Police Service
Page 2 · response
Published 1 November 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

Officers reasonably concluded that section 136 criteria were unmet; not using the power did not constitute inaction.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The officers dealing with Mr Crane acknowledged that Mr Crane had been at hospital for his mental health earlier that day, that he was inappropriately dressed for the weather conditions and that he was ‘hearing voices’. However, they formed the view that whilst Mr Crane did appear to be suffering from some kind of mental disorder (hearing voices), he was not in immediate need of care and control, and they did not deem it necessary to remove him to a place of safety. The conditions of use for s136 MHA therefore were not made out. The fact that officers did not invoke their powers under s136 MHA does not mean there was inaction on their part.”

Source location

Response from Metropolitan Police Service
Page 3 · response
Published 1 November 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

Mental health professionals or the care home were responsible for communicating any heightened risk across agency contacts.

Verbatim wording from the response

“If there was heightened risk to Mr Crane, it was for the mental health professionals or care home to make this clear throughout the multiple touch-points across the agencies on the 15th or 16th January and this includes the best opportunity of all when the officer called to inform the care home they were with Mr Crane at the Police Station.”

Source location

Response from Metropolitan Police Service
Page 4 · response
Published 1 November 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

The service was not considered duty-bound to extend support into the community after the resident chose to leave and travel to London.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Prime Life offer a comprehensive induction and training schedule which allow ongoing education and professional development, the training data at the time of the tragic incident were well within our internal KPI, additional steps to reduce risk were limited due to Michael having full capacity around his day to day living, it was his right to go to London and was his right not to stay at the service if he didn’t wish to, the staff supporting Michael at the time were not duty bound to extend this support into the community when Michael decided to leave Island place and head towards London.”

Source location

Response from Prime Life
Page 2 · response
Published 1 November 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
2/2

Data last updated 7 September 2026