Minute Book, home
Coroner’s reportPrevention of future deaths

“Mr Preston had demonstrated, in his early return from home leave in the first few days of…”

Dated 11 Aug 2016, from the coroner for Rutland and North Leicestershire. Sent to 3 organisations or people.

A coroner wrote this report after an inquest, to warn the organisations below about a risk of further deaths.

Read the full report on judiciary.uk

How this works

The 56-day response deadline

Deadline passed

Replies were due by 6 Oct 2016. A reply may have been sent and not yet published.

Organisations that receive a report must reply to the coroner within 56 days, saying what they will do or why they will do nothing. We show whether a response is published on judiciary.uk.

  1. Report dated11 Aug 2016
  2. Deadline6 Oct 2016
  3. Published on judiciary.uk11 Aug 2016
  4. Today23 Oct 2026

Watch this report

We’ll email you when a response is published on judiciary.uk, or when the 56 days to reply end with none published there yet. Free, and you can stop with one click.

Next we ask your name, then send a link to confirm and create your free account. Already have an account? Sign in

Responses from each recipient

Responses from each recipient
Sent toResponse
The Priory HospitalDeadline passedNo response published on judiciary.uk so far. The 56-day deadline was 6 Oct 2016. A reply may have been sent and not yet published.
CheadleDeadline passedNo response published on judiciary.uk so far. The 56-day deadline was 6 Oct 2016. A reply may have been sent and not yet published.
Leicestershire Partnership NHS TrustNamed in the report as “The Leicestershire Partnership NHS Trust”Deadline passedNo response published on judiciary.uk so far. The 56-day deadline was 6 Oct 2016. A reply may have been sent and not yet published.

The coroner’s concerns

This report was published as a scan, so its text was read automatically. Check the wording against the original before you quote it.

(1) Mr Preston had demonstrated, in his early return from home leave in the first few days of November, that living at home was a source of substantial stress, and likely to cause him severe anxiety and deepen his depression. (2) The system for discharge of patients, whereby a nurse makes contact with (in this case) the Leicestershire Crisis Team does not appear to have been robust. There was no documentary proof of the telephone call. (3) There was no immediate follow up by e mail or fax to the Crisis Team to notify the discharge, and the fact that Mr Preston was at high risk because of the anxiety created when he was living at home. (4) As aresult, Mr Preston and his main carer A ere left without support at a time when he was at high risk.

An extract. Read the full report, including the circumstances of the death, on the Courts and Tribunals Judiciary website.

Source
judiciary.uk, Prevention of Future Deaths reports
Added to Minute Book
8 Oct 2026
Reuse
We show short extracts and link to the original. We don’t host the full report.

Something wrong, such as a date or who it was sent to? Report a mistake

Is this report about someone close to you? You can ask us to remove names from our pages.

Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Source: Courts and Tribunals Judiciary, judiciary.uk. Open Government Licence v3.0

Ask about this report

AI

Summaries and questions, with page references. Pro and above.

Sign in to use