Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2025

Michael Moore

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2025-0463, written 11 Sep 2025. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report11 Sep 2025
Reference2025-0463
DeceasedMichael Moore
CoronerSamantha Goward
Coroner areaNorfolk
CategoryHospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths
Sourcejudiciary.uk record · original PDF
Responses published1

The report

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

Regulation 28: REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS

NOTE: This form is to be used after an inquest.

REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT DEATHS

THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO:

NHS ENGLAND

1

CORONER

I am Samantha GOWARD, Senior Coroner for the coroner area of Norfolk

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 30 September 2024 I commenced an investigation into the death of Michael Leonard
MOORE aged 83. The investigation concluded at the end of the inquest on 04 September
2025.

The medical cause of death was:

Recurrent Metastatic High Grade Urothelial Carcinoma

1a)
1b)
1c)
1d)

2)

Left Subacute Frontal Infarct, Ischaemic Heart Disease

The conclusion of the inquest was:
Died due to underlying natural causes, the diagnosis and treatment of which was delayed
due to lengthy waiting lists.

4

CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH

1.

In summary, Mr Moore was being managed under the hospital’s Urology team after
a previous diagnosis of high risk non-muscle invasive bladder cancer for which he
was having surveillance cystoscopies (bladder checks) since 2021. He had also had
radiotherapy for prostate cancer in 2012.

2. At a check up in July 2023, an abnormal area was noted, and a biopsy was

requested. While he was still awaiting the biopsy, some 9 months later, he was
admitted as an emergency in April 2024. On examination he was found to have a
mass causing compression. A defunctioning colostomy was performed to bypass
the obstruction on 15 April 2024 and a biopsy taken which showed disease in
keeping with spread from a high grade urothelial carcinoma (bladder cancer) which
was said to be advanced and not curable. He was seen on 2 July 2024 by an
Oncologist who felt that due to the advanced cancer and his frailty, active
treatment was not in his best interests & Mr Moore was placed under the care of
the palliative team and died at home on 17 September 2024.

3. The evidence heard was that there was a delay in the biopsy being performed after

the check up in July 2023 due to lengthy waiting lists at the Trust. I was advised
that Mr Moore should have had his biopsy within 28 days – so by late August 2023.

Regulation 28 – After Inquest
Document Template Updated 30/07/2021

 4.

5.

It was not done until April 2024, and then only as he was admitted as an

emergency. This was therefore approximately an 8 month delay (and based on the
fact he was still on the waiting list, would have been longer if not for the
emergency admission).

I heard evidence that he suffered a cerebral infarct in June 2024 while awaiting
Oncology review. It was said in July 2024 when he was seen by an Oncologist that
the only treatment option for him was palliative chemo, but he was not fit enough
to undergo that treatment.

If he had undergone a biopsy in August 2023, on the basis of the evidence heard I
found that this would have identified the reoccurrence of the cancer at that time.
On the balance of probabilities the cancer would have been at an earlier stage and
there would have been more treatment options available. It was not possible to
say on balance of probabilities, based on available evidence, that any treatment
would have been curative given the nature of the cancer and his frailty, but it is a
possibility and there was a missed opportunity to commence earlier treatment.

5

CORONER’S CONCERNS

During the course of the investigation my inquiries revealed matters giving rise to concern.
In my opinion there is a risk that future deaths could occur unless action is taken. In the
circumstances it is my statutory duty to report to you.

The MATTERS OF CONCERN are as follows:

The evidence of the Hospital Trust was that work had been ongoing in recent years to
reduce delays, but that while there had been some initial improvement, there had been a
further decline which I was told is in part due to an increase in referrals due to high profile
celebrities announcing their cancer diagnoses and rightly encouraging people to come
forward with any symptoms of concern. Therefore, despite local measures to improve
performance, this has been significantly affected by a rise in cancer referrals. I was
advised that this surge has been widely reported across the NHS and I was advised that
NHS England has acknowledged persistent capacity constraints across many providers. The
concern therefore is that the NHS does not have the ability to deal with the significant
number of cancer referrals received and this is causing significant delays in waiting times
which impacts on those awaiting a diagnosis, undergoing surveillance and delays in
diagnosing a recurrence and those awaiting treatment.

ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN

In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I believe you (and/or
your organisation) 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 November 06, 2025. 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.
COPIES and PUBLICATION

8

I have sent a copy of my report to the Chief Coroner and to the following Interested
Persons:

Mr Moore’s family
Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital

Regulation 28 – After Inquest
Document Template Updated 30/07/2021

 I am also under a duty to send a copy of your response to the Chief Coroner and all
interested persons who in my opinion should receive it.

I may also send a copy of your response to any person who I believe may find it useful or
of interest.

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

Dated: 11/09/2025

Samantha GOWARD
Senior Coroner for Norfolk
County Hall
Martineau Lane
Norwich
NR1 2DH

Regulation 28 – After Inquest
Document Template Updated 30/07/2021

Responses

1 response 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 NHS England (PDF)
Ms Samantha Goward 
HM Senior Coroner  
Norfolk Coroner’s Service  
County Hall 
Martineau Lane  
Norwich  
NR1 2DH  

National Medical Director  
NHS England  
Wellington House 
133-155 Waterloo Road  
London 
SE1 8UG 

5th November 2025  

Dear Coroner, 

Re: Regulation 28 Report to Prevent Future Deaths – Michael Leonard Moore 
who died on 17 September 2024.  

Thank  you  for  your  Report  to  Prevent  Future  Deaths  (hereafter  “Report”)  dated  11 
September 2025 concerning the death of Michael Leonard Moore on 17 September 
2024. In advance of responding to the specific concerns raised in your Report, I would 
like  to  express  my  deep  condolences  to  Michael’s  family  and  loved  ones.  NHS 
England  is  keen  to  assure  the  family  and  yourself  that  the  concerns  raised  about 
Michael’s care have been listened to and reflected upon.   

Your report raises concerns around the NHS being unable to deal with the significant 
increase in cancer referrals received, causing significant delays in waiting times for 
referral,  which  in  turn  impacts  on  those  awaiting  a  diagnosis  or  undergoing 
surveillance, and those awaiting treatment.  

Regional improvements 

NHS  England’s  East  of  England  regional  colleagues  have  been  advised  by  NHS 
Norfolk and Waveney Integrated Care Board (N&W ICB) that, to address the situation 
going forward, the following actions have been agreed with the Urology department at 
Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital:  

1.  A ‘capacity and demand’ review to identify gaps in service and move away from 
ad hoc Waiting List Initiatives (WLIs), with a view to meeting demand through 
recruitment to substantive posts. There is anticipated funding in place for the 
extension of a current locum post via the Cancer Alliance.  

2.  A ‘review and validation’ of the Category P2 list which is part of the National 
Clinical  Prioritisation  Programme,  which  is  a  technical  and  clinical  review  of 
patients  waiting  for  elective  care  treatment.  Categories  P2-P4  relate  to  the 
period of time in which it would be clinically appropriate for a patient to wait for 
their procedure. Confirmed P2 cases should not wait longer than 4-6 weeks for 
treatment.  

3.  A ‘case by case’ review of patients awaiting both rigid cystoscopy and biopsy, 
as  these  represent  the  highest  risk  if  delayed.  These  will  be  expedited  as 
appropriate.  

                                                                                                                       
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Alongside  this,  through  the  Clinical  Harm  Incident  Group,  Norfolk  and  Norwich 
University  Hospital  will  continue  to  monitor  potential  or  actual  harm  caused  to  long 
waiting patients that either have an emergency admission or die whilst on an elective 
waiting list or breach 104 days on their cancer pathways, providing the opportunity to 
identify  emerging  issues  within  specialties  and  address  these.  One  of  their  local 
Patient Safety priorities for 2025/26 is emergency admissions of patients on a waiting 
list,  and  a  thematic  review  is  planned.  More  generally,  the  ongoing  scrutiny  of  the 
waiting list, review of long waiting patients and scrutiny through validation continues.  

National position 

According to your Report, the evidence of the Hospital Trust at the inquest hearing 
included that the surge in cancer referrals has been widely reported across the NHS 
and that NHS England has acknowledged persistent capacity constraints across many 
providers. It is correct that the number of people referred for urgent cancer checks has 
increased  significantly  over  the  past  decade.  This  reached  3.2  million  in  2024-25, 
which was double the number of referrals in 2014-15. However, while there is ongoing 
work  to  deliver  on  the  national  cancer  waiting  times  standards,  performance  has 
actually  improved  over  the  past  two  years.  In  March  2025,  the  NHS  in  England 
achieved its target for the Faster Diagnosis Standard (FDS) – this standard was that 
77% of people should receive a diagnosis or ruling out of cancer within 28 days of an 
urgent referral. The NHS also met its interim 70% target, set in the 2024/25 Priorities 
and Operational Planning Guidance, for the 62 day standard (the standard is that 85% 
of people with cancer should start treatment within 62 days of an urgent referral). This 
improvement gave NHS England the confidence to set more stretching national targets 
in its 2025/26 Operational Planning Guidance. The new targets are 80% for the FDS 
and 75% for the 62 day standard. 

I  would  also  like  to  provide  further  assurances  on  the  national  NHS  England  work 
taking  place around  the  Reports  to  Prevent Future  Deaths.  All  reports  received  are 
discussed  by  the  Regulation  28  Working  Group,  comprising  Regional  Medical 
Directors,  and  other  clinical  and  quality  colleagues  from  across  the  regions.  This 
ensures  that  key  learnings  and  insights  around  events,  such  as  the  sad  death  of 
Michael, are shared across the NHS at both a national and regional level and helps 
us to pay close attention to any emerging trends that may require further review and 
action.   

Thank you for bringing these important patient safety issues to my attention and please 
do not hesitate to contact me should you need any further information.  

Yours sincerely,  

 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
  National Medical Director 
 NHS England

Related reports

Other reports by Samantha Goward

See all →

More reports categorised “Hospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths”

See all →

Track Hospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths

See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching Hospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths, 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.