PFD report

Richard John Dyson and Simon Brian Midgley · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 14 Apr 2021•West Yorkshire Eastern

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
2

Raised in this report

Recipients
1

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 1 recipient

Stated actions
2

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 raised2

  1. Failure to ensure that the guest list is taken or remains available during evacuation
  2. Lack of readily accessible and accurate establishment occupant lists for emergency services
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

    Work with SFRS to consider updating fire-safety guidance to explicitly require maintaining accurate paper or digital guest lists.

    Stated by Scottish GovernmentStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 15 April 2021.

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 ensure that the guest list is taken or remains available during evacuation

Wider context from the report

“(1) Every hotel should have a readily accessible and accurate list of the guests and staff members in the establishment on a particular night. In an emergency situation it is imperative that the Fire and Rescue Service are provided with accurate information speedily in case anyone remains trapped in the building. It is a situation where every second counts. (2) It is foreseeable that in the stressful atmosphere of an emergency, people may hesitate or make mistakes. In this case, forgetting to take the guest list as the building was evacuated. In consequence, although the Fire and Rescue Service had arrived at the hotel by 6.51 am, it was not until sometime after 8am that it was established two guests were missing. Critical time was lost before rescue efforts began to find them. The precise times cannot be provided as the Procurator Fiscal was not willing to disclose copies of witness statements or reports on the ground they were confidential. (3) To avoid needless impediments to rescue efforts, it would be prudent for hotels to have an electronic system such as SharePoint which would enable the emergency services to gain prompt access to such vital information. ”

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

Lack of readily accessible and accurate establishment occupant lists for emergency services

Wider context from the report

“(1) Every hotel should have a readily accessible and accurate list of the guests and staff members in the establishment on a particular night. In an emergency situation it is imperative that the Fire and Rescue Service are provided with accurate information speedily in case anyone remains trapped in the building. It is a situation where every second counts. (2) It is foreseeable that in the stressful atmosphere of an emergency, people may hesitate or make mistakes. In this case, forgetting to take the guest list as the building was evacuated. In consequence, although the Fire and Rescue Service had arrived at the hotel by 6.51 am, it was not until sometime after 8am that it was established two guests were missing. Critical time was lost before rescue efforts began to find them. The precise times cannot be provided as the Procurator Fiscal was not willing to disclose copies of witness statements or reports on the ground they were confidential. (3) To avoid needless impediments to rescue efforts, it would be prudent for hotels to have an electronic system such as SharePoint which would enable the emergency services to gain prompt access to such vital information. ”

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

Work with SFRS to consider updating fire-safety guidance to explicitly require maintaining accurate paper or digital guest lists.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The Scottish Government will work with SFRS to consider updating the guidance to make it more explicit that an accurate guest list, whether paper or digital, should be maintained to aid in ensuring all guests are evacuated; as well as for passing on relevant details to SFRS.”

Source location

2021-0108-Response-from-Scottish-Government-Published
Page 1 · response
Published 15 April 2021

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.1

  1. 1

    Ensure receipt of SFRS updates on hotel fire safety during regularly scheduled meetings throughout the year.

    Stated by Scottish GovernmentStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 15 April 2021.

Recipient positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when they do not describe a specific action.1

  1. 1

    Operational actions following the fire are the responsibility of the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service.

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

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

Ensure receipt of SFRS updates on hotel fire safety during regularly scheduled meetings throughout the year.

Verbatim wording from the response

“I will ensure I receive updates from SFRS on hotel fire safety during our regularly scheduled meetings throughout the year.”

Source location

2021-0108-Response-from-Scottish-Government-Published
Page 2 · response
Published 15 April 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

Operational actions following the fire are the responsibility of the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In terms of the actions taken by SFRS following the fire, operational matters are for SFRS. Scottish Ministers appoint a Chair and other members to serve as members of SFRS, collectively referred to as the Board. The Board provides strategic direction, support and guidance to the SFRS ensuring that it operates effectively and that the Scottish Government’s priorities are implemented.”

Source location

2021-0108-Response-from-Scottish-Government-Published
Page 1 · response
Published 15 April 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

Official responses located
1/1

Data last updated 7 September 2026