PFD report

John Joseph Jennings · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 26 Nov 2020•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
1

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 raised1

  1. Lack of statutory requirements for the Code of Practice and British Standard 5839 LD1 Maximum Protection level
Responses linked to these concerns

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

No linked response statements

No respondent-stated action or position is clearly linked to these concerns.

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 statutory requirements for the Code of Practice and British Standard 5839 LD1 Maximum Protection level

Wider context from the report

“1. Evidence was heard expressing concern that the above Code of Practice and British Standard 5839 LD1 Maximum Protection level were not currently statutory requirements. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

Open source report

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

    Conduct a full technical review of building-regulation standards, including issues concerning smoke alarms.

    Stated by Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local GovernmentStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 30 December 2020.
  2. 2

    Ask officials to raise fire-detection standards for vulnerable residents with the relevant British Standards committee for consideration.

    Stated by Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local GovernmentStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 30 December 2020.

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

  1. 1

    LD3 remains an appropriate minimum fire-detection standard for the general population, although higher protection may be justified for vulnerable residents.

    Stated by Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local GovernmentDisputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.

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

Conduct a full technical review of building-regulation standards, including issues concerning smoke alarms.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The Government are committed to bringing about the biggest change in building safety for a generation. Part of that programme of work is a full technical review of the standards that support building regulations the important issues of smoke alarms will, of course, be considered as part of that review.”

Source location

2020-0257-Response-from-Secretary-of-State-for-Housing-Communities-and-Local-Government-Redacted.pdf
Page 1 · response
Published 30 December 2020

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

Ask officials to raise fire-detection standards for vulnerable residents with the relevant British Standards committee for consideration.

Verbatim wording from the response

“If this was as a result of him being identified as vulnerable, then one might ask why the level of fire detection was not also considered at that time. I have asked my officials to raise this with the relevant committee at the British Standards Institute for consideration.”

Source location

2020-0257-Response-from-Secretary-of-State-for-Housing-Communities-and-Local-Government-Redacted.pdf
Page 1 · response
Published 30 December 2020

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

LD3 remains an appropriate minimum fire-detection standard for the general population, although higher protection may be justified for vulnerable residents.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The current guidance supporting building regulations currently sets the minimum level of protection at LD3 in new homes. When this matter was last reviewed, it was concluded that LD3 was an appropriate standard for the general population, however it is recognised in the guidance that a higher standard may be justified where the residents of a building are more vulnerable. It is not clear from your report why it was considered necessary to provide Mr Jennings with a connection to an alarm monitoring company.”

Source location

2020-0257-Response-from-Secretary-of-State-for-Housing-Communities-and-Local-Government-Redacted.pdf
Page 1 · response
Published 30 December 2020

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