PFD report

Kenneth Roy Bardsley · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 27 Dec 2018•Manchester South

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
8

Raised in this report

Recipients
5

Named on the report

Responses found
0

Of 5 recipients

Stated actions
0

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 raised8

  1. Lack of statutory minimum requirements for lift servicing
  2. Lack of a care home system for reviewing and passing lift examination details to the servicing company
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable LOLER thorough examinations of lifting equipment
  3. Lack of formal minimum qualification standards for lift engineers
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to ensure lift engineers are competent to install and service lifts
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 minimum requirements for lift servicing

Wider context from the report

“7. That the lift company Lancs and Cumbria Lifts had abandoned their old paper checklists and introduced an electronic appointment system. However that system did not include an electronic checklist. One had now been introduced. It was unclear if other companies have checklists and if so how consistent are they. The inquest heard that there was no statutory minimum expectation about the requirements of a lift service. ”

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 a care home system for reviewing and passing lift examination details to the servicing company

Wider context from the report

“5. That Serendipity Care Home did not have a system in place to ensure details from the lift examinations were read; considered and passed on to the lift servicing company; ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable LOLER thorough examinations of lifting equipment.

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 formal minimum qualification standards for lift engineers

Wider context from the report

“1. The inquest heard that there are no formal requirements for a minimum standard of qualification for people to be lift engineers. In effect, anyone can advertise themselves as a lift engineer/maintenance company; ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to ensure lift engineers are competent to install and service lifts.

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 clarity about informing engineers of and following up regulatory lift examination requirements

Wider context from the report

“3. During the inquest evidence was given that within the specific lift company in this case and more widely, there was a lack of clarity as to how engineers should be made aware and follow up requirements made by engineers carrying out the regulatory lift examinations; ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable LOLER thorough examinations of lifting equipment.

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

Electronic lift servicing appointment systems lacking checklists

Wider context from the report

“7. That the lift company Lancs and Cumbria Lifts had abandoned their old paper checklists and introduced an electronic appointment system. However that system did not include an electronic checklist. One had now been introduced. It was unclear if other companies have checklists and if so how consistent are they. The inquest heard that there was no statutory minimum expectation about the requirements of a lift service. ”

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 home inspections to identify unacted-on regulatory lift examination faults

Wider context from the report

“4. In inspections of the home, the CQC did not pick up that there were faults identified in the regulatory examination that had not been acted upon; ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure of external safety inspections to identify physical safety deficiencies.

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 read, act on, and escalate regulatory lift examination findings

Wider context from the report

“2. The evidence given to the inquest was that there was a gap in the system which meant that regulatory lift examinations could take place but not be read or acted upon, with no escalation process; ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable LOLER thorough examinations of lifting equipment.

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 require lift servicing and repair engineers to obtain regulatory examination reports

Wider context from the report

“6. That the lift company Lancs and Cumbria engineers carrying out serving/repairs were not expected to ask to see the regulatory examination reports; ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

Open source report
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
0/5

Data last updated 7 September 2026

No official response is included in the current published snapshot.