Minute Book, home
Coroner’s reportPrevention of future deaths · 2024-0443

“For the Priory - DORKING 1”

Dated 12 Aug 2024, from the coroner for Manchester North. 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

All responses published

Replies were due by 7 Oct 2024.

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; a reply may have been sent and not yet published.

  1. Report dated12 Aug 2024
  2. Deadline7 Oct 2024
  3. Published on judiciary.uk12 Aug 2024
  4. Today27 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

The coroner’s concerns

For the Priory - DORKING 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. The Incident Review of his admission to the Priory Dorking indicated that there was no My Safety Plan commenced on admission or complete prior to his discharge. There was no engagement prior to discharge with the local Home Based Treatment Team. There was no consultation with the Consultants who had treated Mr Thompson at the Priory in Altrincham only a few weeks earlier. There was no 48 hour follow up call to Mr Thompson following his discharge, as per Priory Policy. A discharge clinical entry and discharge risk assessment was not completed and there was no evidence of crisis information having been provided. There was no evidence that the four standard care plans had been opened during Mr Thompsons inpatient stay. When conducting the internal review no members of the nursing staff were spoken to to consider why the matters highlighted above had not been carried out. There was therefore a lack of understanding as to whether this was an individual failing or error or a cultural / system failure. Nor was consideration given to whether any individuals should be reported to their regulatory body. For the Priory - ALTRINCHAM 1. On the outpatient appointment in January 2024 the fact that Mr Thompson had been an inpatient in the Priory in Dorking following his discharge from the Priory Altrincham was not known. There was a lack of awareness as to how to access certain parts of the medical records which would have shown this information. Mr Thompson did not volunteer this information so there was no discussion with him as to why he had relapsed so quickly. 2. At the time of his appointment in January 2024 Mr Thompson was not under any NHS community services such as the home based treatment team. This was not recognised or known when formulating his ongoing plan. 3. No internal review was undertaken of Mr Thompsons admission within the Priory Altrincham to consider whether there was any learning For All: 1. There was a complete absence of any Consultant – Consultant discussions or communication, given this patient was receiving care from both the NHS and privately.

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, 2024-0443
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