Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2020

Deborah Lamont

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2020-0008, written 20 Jan 2020. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report20 Jan 2020
Reference2020-0008
DeceasedDeborah Lamont
CoronerGraeme Hughes
Coroner areaSouth Wales Central
CategorySuicide (from 2015) · Wales prevention of future deaths reports (2019 onwards)
Sourcejudiciary.uk record · original PDF
Responses published2

The report

Text extracted from the PDF text layer. Reproduced verbatim, including the scan's own layout.

CORONER’S OFFICE
GRAEME HUGHES
THE OLD COURTHOUSE
HER MAJESTY’S
COURTHOUSE STREET
ACTING SENIOR CORONER
PONTYPRIDD
SOUTH WALES CENTRAL
CF37 1JW
CORONER AREA
Telephone: 01443 281100
Facsimile: 01443 485862
Email: Coroneradmin@rctcbc.gov.uk
REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS
THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO: The Chief Constable of South Wales Police & The Chief Executive of
the College of Policing
1 CORONER
I am Graeme Hughes Acting Senior Coroner for South Wales Central
2 CORONER’S LEGAL POWERS
I make this report under paragraph 7, Schedule 5, of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 and regulations
28 and 29 of the Coroners (Investigations) Regulations 2013.
3 INVESTIGATION and INQUEST
On 04/04/2019 I commenced an investigation into the death of Deborah Margaret LAMONT. The
investigation concluded at the end of an inquest on 17th January 2020. How, when & where she came
about her death were found as follows:‐
On 28.3.19 Deborah Margaret Lamont has travelled to the Village Hotel, Whitchurch. There, at some
time after 9.40pm she has tied a ligature around her neck and suspended herself from an anchor point
above the entrance door. She was found deceased by South Wales Police Officers just after 11pm. The
evidence was sufficient to determine that she intended the consequences of her actions to be her own
death.
My conclusion was Suicide
4 BRIEF CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH
SWP officers attended room 161 at the Village Hotel at approximately 23:05 on Thursday 28/03/19 in
response to a report from Hotel staff, concerned for the guest Debbie Lamont (DL).
Staff had been unable to get a response from Debbie and when opening the door to her room they
believed that she was slumped behind the door and were unable to open the door further than a few
inches.
Upon officers arrival staff used a key card to open the door and it was noted that a white bed sheet was
wrapped around the overhead fire door closer which was attached to something heavy behind the door
and inside the room.
Officers have at this point tried to remove the sheet however it was taut. Officers managed to slide inside
the room and found Debbie slumped on her knees facing the bathroom with the bed sheet tied in a
noose around her neck and suspending her slightly against the door. She was limp, cold to touch & pale.
There were no obvious signs of a disturbance.
Officers have commenced CPR chest compressions and rescue breaths and applied the defibrillator pads
to her for around 10 minutes until Paramedics arrived. The defibrillator repeatedly advised no shock was
advisable and to continue CPR.
Eventually Paramedics arrived and continued with CPR for around 30 minutes eventually declaring ROLE
at 23:43 hours.
DL had experienced a suicidal episode earlier in the day in the hotel where response officers have
attended. They have noticed that she was upset, sat with tights tied around her neck and superficial
scratch's to her wrists. Paramedics attended and she spoke with the police control room Mental Health
supervisor at the time. It was determined that she would be able to stay at the hotel as follow up mental
health contact would be arranged.
5 CORONER’S CONCERNS
During the course of the inquest the evidence revealed matters giving rise to concern. In my opinion
there is a risk that future deaths will occur unless action is taken. In the circumstances it is my statutory
duty to report to you.
The MATTERS OF CONCERN are as follows. –
(1) The Inquest focused upon the response of the emergency services ‐ SWP, WAST & CTMUHB
Mental Health Nurse, to the earlier suicidal episode. Evidence was received from amongst
others, of SWP, – paramedic from WAST & Mental Health Nurse,
regarding their involvement with DL.
gave evidence as to his interpretation of s136 Mental Health Act 1983(MHA). In
particular, whether he believed that the power to remove DL arose in the particular
circumstances he was presented with on the evening of 28.3.19.
In summary, his interpretation of s136 was that, even if he had been satisfied that DL was
suffering from a mental disorder & in immediate need of care, or control, the power to detain
would not have been available to him, due to the exclusion in s136(1A). His interpretation of
that sub‐section was that as DL had paid for the hotel room in which she was staying, that was a
room in which she was living.
Regard was had during the Inquest as to the Department of Health Guidance to the changes to
the MHA 1983, published in October 2017. No specific guidance as to the classification of a hotel
room for the purposes of whether that falls within the exception in s136 (1A) is provided.
Whilst it is accepted, both by myself, & in the Guidance, as above, that there will always be
some degree of discretion for a police officer to exercise in relation to the interpretation of
whether a person is living in a hotel room, the evidence here was that DL had booked into the
room for one night & had no more than a bare licence to occupy it (which would contrast with,
for example, an individual or family temporarily housed in a hotel room by a local authority, or a
care home resident occupying indefinitely a room in a care home).
Hence, based upon the evidence I received, and my interpretation (in these particular
circumstances) of whether a hotel room came within s136 (1A) MHA, I found it likely that
did have the power to remove DL to a place of safety
My concern is that faced with a similar situation (albeit in circumstances were the officer did
consider a person was suffering from mental disorder and requiring of immediate care, or
control), an officer may reach the same conclusion as determine the power to
remove did not exist, and this may lead to a risk of death to that individual.
I would emphasise that whilst I interpreted s136 MHA as likely to afford the power
to remove DL on the night in question, I found his assessment of DL to be a reasonable one, and
that the grounds to remove her did not exist as she was not in immediate need of care, or
control.
(2) I consider that it is necessary for the police to consider their interpretation of whether a hotel
room falls within the exception provided for by s136 (1A) MHA, and to provide clear guidance,
and instruction to officers faced with exercising their powers under s136 MHA in circumstances
were an individual presents with suffering from mental disorder, is requiring of immediate care
or control and at that time is located in a hotel room.
6 ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN
In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I believe you have the power to take
such action.
7 YOUR RESPONSE
You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of this report, namely by 16th
March 2020. I, the coroner, may extend the period.
Your response must contain details of action taken or proposed to be taken, setting out the timetable for
action. Otherwise you must explain why no action is proposed.
8 COPIES and PUBLICATION
I have sent a copy of my report to the College of Policing, the Local Health Board Mental Health Team
and the family who may find it useful or of interest.
I am also under a duty to send the Chief Coroner a copy of your response.
The Chief Coroner may publish either or both in a complete or redacted or summary form. He may send a
copy of this report to any person who he believes may find it useful or of interest. You may make
representations to me, the coroner, at the time of your response, about the release or the publication of
your response by the Chief Coroner.
9 20/01/2020
Signature
Graeme Hughes Acting Senior Coroner South Wales Central
Please note that the office is open between 8.00 a.m. and 4.00 p.m. on Monday to Friday
only. Telephone queries outside these hours and days may not be able to be dealt with until
the office is next open.

Responses

2 responses published against this report on judiciary.uk. A response is a body's written reply to the coroner's concerns; publication is at the discretion of the Chief Coroner's office, so an absent response does not mean nobody replied.

Response from The Chief Constable of South Wales (PDF)
CADW DE CYMRU’N DDIOGEL « KEEPING SOUTH WALES SAFE
Coroner's Office

11 MAR 2020

Received

we
x

Og,

WN

2
ai i is

iy
eid

|
a
=

AN!
Ws
SS
vemees |) =
<a
CAN
Biers

Temporary Assistant Chief Constable ca area
South Waies Police

South Wales Police Headquarters
Cowbridge Road

Bridgend

CF31 3SU

10" March 2020

Mr Graeme Hughes

Acting Senior Coroner

Coroner’s Office: South Wales Central
The Old Courthouse

Courthouse Street

Pontypridd
CF37 1JW

Re: Deborah Margaret LAMONT Deceased
Dear J a

(

| write on behalf of the Chief Constable of the South Wales Police in response to the
Prevention of Future Deaths report of the 20 January 2020 in relation to Deborah Margaret
LAMONT (deceased).

Your notice under Paragraph 7, Schedule 5 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 and
Regulations 28 and 29 of the Coroners (Investigations) Regulations 2013 sets out your
concerns which may be summarised as:-

1) Whether s136 could have been legally used in a hotel room if the officer concerned felt
it was necessary to do so and;

2) For the Police and College of Policing to consider their interpretation of whether a hotel
room falls within the exception provided for by s136 (1A) Mental Health Act (MHA), and

HEDDLU DE CYMRU SOUTH WALES POLICE
Pencadlys Heddlu De Cymru, Heol y Bont-faen, Penybont CF31 3SU South Wales Police Headquarters, Cowbridge Road, Bridgend CF3) 3SUI
Mewn argyfwng ffontwch 999, fel arall, ffoniweh 101 In an emergency always dial 999, for non-emergencies dial 101
Gwefan: www.heddlu-de-cymru.police.uk © Website: www.south-wales.police.uk
Maza Heddiu De Cymru yn croesawu derbyn gohebiaeth yn Gymraeg a Saesneg. South Wales Police welcomes receiving cotrespondence in Welsh and English,

Byddwn yn ateb gohebiseth a dderbynnir yn Gymraeg yn Gymraeg ac ni fydd = Any correspondence received In Welsh will be answered in Welsh and corresponding
gohebu yn Gymraeg yn arwain at oedi. in Welsh will not lead to a delay in responding.

Prif Gwnstab! EE QPM, MA(Oxon)MSc. Chief Constable

to provide clear guidance and instruction to officers faced with similar circumstances.

The report was sent to the Chief Constable and the Chief Executive of the College of Policing
and we have had the benefit of being copied into the response a
Faculty Lead for Uniformed Policing, College of Policing dated 3 March 2020.

As you are aware, the College of Policing was established in 2012 and its purpose is to
provide those working in policing with the skills and knowledge necessary to prevent crime,
protect the public, and secure public trust. They hold three complementary functions namely
Knowledge, Education and Standards.

The latter function includes the maintenance of Authorised Professional Practice (APP). APP
is the official source of professional practice on policing. Police officers and staff are expected
to have regard to APP in discharging their responsibilities.

We note that the College of Policing has sought its own legal advice to assist in the provision
of a response and have shared your view that s.136 was an available option in this instance
but there is no legal basis to mandate this.

The Chief Constable also notes that whilst you interpreted s.136 as likely to afford the officer
the power to remove Dr Lamont on the night in question, his [the officers] assessment of Dr
Lamont was a reasonable one and the grounds to remove her did not exist [at that time] as
she was not in immediate need of care or control.

The Chief Constable notes that the College will circulate a summary of this issue to all police
force mental health leads across England and Wales so that they can ensure that their
officers consider the use of s136 in similar circumstances. It is noted that in addition, the
College has raised the issue with the Home Office and will work together to assess the need
for relevant changes to the current national guidance (APP) in relation to the use of $136 and
hotel rooms. The College will ensure that all Forces are kept appraised of developments.

The Chief Constable has also asked that this issue is fully considered by the Force Mental
health lead in the intervening period and the use of hotel rooms and s.136 is subject of a
specific note upon force guidance and within training. This will be the interim position until
such time as the Home Office and/or College of Policing offer the additional guidance and/or
legislative amendment etc.

It is hoped that this response combined with that of the College of Policing will address the
issues and concerns as set out in your report.

Yours Sincerely

TACC as
Response from The College of Police (PDF)
Mr Graeme Hughes 
HM Acting Senior Coroner for the area of South Wales Central 
The Old Courthouse 
Courthouse Street 
Pontypridd 
CF37 1JW 

3rd March 2020 

Re: Deborah Margaret LAMONT Deceased 

Dear Mr Hughes, 

I write on behalf of the College of Policing in response to the Prevention of Future Deaths report of the 20 
January 2020 in relation to Deborah Margaret LAMONT (deceased) who sadly lost her life through suicide in 
2019.  

The notice sets out concerns that arose from the information received during the inquest into the death of 
Deborah Lamont. We are very sorry to read of the circumstances of Deborah’s death and our sympathies 
are with her family and friends. We share your commitment to addressing the issues that have been raised 
following her untimely loss.  

When dealing with such incidents, the duty of care shown by officers to the individual concerned is always 
paramount and we welcome any findings and recommendations to ensure that the highest standards are 
maintained. 

Your notice sets out your principle concerns namely: 

1)  Whether  s136  could  have  been  legally  used  in  a  hotel  room  if  the  officer  concerned  felt  it  was 

necessary to do so and; 

2)  For the police to consider their interpretation of whether a hotel room falls within the exception provided 
for by s136 (1A) Mental Health Act (MHA), and to provide clear guidance and instruction to officers 
faced with similar circumstances. 

In this case, the officer’s interpretation of s136 MHA was that the power to detain was not available to him as 
he believed that, having paid for the hotel room in which she was staying, Deborah Lamont was ‘living’ there. 
This can cause confusion as there are occasions and situations where some people do ‘live’ in hotels, for 
example when they have been displaced following serious incidents and are subsequently housed in hotels 
by Local Authorities. In these cases there is no doubt that the people in the hotel are clearly ‘living’ there. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 The use of s136 MHA is prohibited “in any house, flat or room where that person or another person is living.” 
When  the  Home  Office  and  Department  of  Health  produced  guidance  for  the  2017  amendments  to  the 
MHA1983, the document did not contain any reference to hotels. That guidance states that in most situations 
it will be obvious whether or not s136 applies, “however in other situations it may be less-clear cut”.  

As this is a matter of law, the College has sought its own legal advice to assist in providing this response. The 
advice received agreed with your assessment that someone “living” in a room implies that the person normally 
resides in that place and is not there temporarily. There are no definitions provided within the legislation and 
no stated cases that assist in providing clarification. Consequently, the use of s136 in these circumstances is 
a subjective one and requiring individual assessment and interpretation. In other words, the use of s136 in the 
case of Deborah Lamont could have been a consideration.  

In summary, I share your view that s136 was an available option in this instance but there is no legal basis 
to mandate this. I am therefore going to be amending the College guidance in respect of the use of s136 
powers and will ask that a summary of this issue is circulated to all police force mental health leads across 
England and Wales so that they can ensure that their officers consider the use of s136 in similar 
circumstances. The College has already raised the issue with the Home Office and we will work together to 
assess the need for relevant changes to the current national guidance in relation to the use of s136 and 
hotel rooms.  The College will keep forces appraised of developments. 

I hope that this addresses the concerns that you set out in your report and I am grateful for you bringing 
them to my attention.  

Yours sincerely 

Faculty Lead Uniformed Policing

Related reports

Other reports by Graeme Hughes

See all →

More reports categorised “Suicide (from 2015)”

See all →

Track Suicide (from 2015)

See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching Suicide (from 2015), and how often a new one appears.

What would an alert for this have sent me? Search the full text

Free to try — the preview shows the real matches and how many arrived in the last 12 months. Your first email alert is free.

These reports are published by the Chief Coroner's office at judiciary.uk and are © Crown copyright. The text here is reproduced from the published PDF so it can be searched. If something on this page is wrong, or you are a person named in it and want it reviewed, email drcjar@gmail.com and we will act promptly.