Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2025
Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2025-0582, written 14 Nov 2025. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.
| Date of report | 14 Nov 2025 |
|---|---|
| Reference | 2025-0582 |
| Deceased | Suzanne Ellerby |
| Coroner | Anna Loxton |
| Coroner area | Surrey |
| Category | Hospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths |
| Organisation named | Surrey and Borders Partnership NHS Foundation Trust |
| Source | judiciary.uk record · original PDF |
| Responses published | 2 |
Text extracted from the PDF text layer. Reproduced verbatim, including the scan's own layout.
IN THE SURREY CORONER’S COURT
IN THE MATTER OF:
__________________________________________________________
The Inquest Touching the Death of Suzanne Julia ELLERBY
A Regulation 28 Report – Action to Prevent Future Deaths
__________________________________________________________
THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO:
1.
2.
, Chief Executive Officer, NHS England:
, Parliamentary Under-Secretary for
Patient Safety, Women’s Health and Mental Health, 39 Victoria
Street, London SW1H 0EU
1 CORONER
Ms Anna Loxton, HM Assistant Coroner for Surrey
2 CORONER’S LEGAL POWERS
I make this report under paragraph 7(1) of Schedule 5 to The Coroners
and Justice Act 2009.
3
INVESTIGATION and INQUEST
Suzanne Julie Ellerby died on 4th January 2025, aged 57. Her inquest was
opened on 23rd January 2025. The inquest took place on 6th November
2025 and Findings and Conclusion were given on 10th November 2025. I
recorded a conclusion of Suicide.
I found the medical cause of death to be:
4 CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH
I recorded the following circumstances in relation to Ms Ellerby’s death:
On the afternoon of 4th January 2025, Suzanne Ellerby was found deceased in
her Father’s home in Addlestone, Surrey, where she had
been residing, and her death was confirmed by an attending paramedic at 14.40.
Ms Ellerby had a history of mental health vulnerabilities, but had been stable for
a number of years prior to a downturn in her social circumstances, which
included the loss of her home and necessitated relocation to Surrey and the loss
of her employment. She suffered a mental health crisis on 29th November,
RT4563
1
following which she was under the care of the Home Treatment Team, Surrey
and Borders Partnership, from 30th November 2024. She was discharged from
the Home Treatment Team to the care of her new General Practitioner, who she
had not previously seen, on 13th December 2024. Ms Ellerby was not seen by any
mental health or medical practitioners between 13th December and her death,
and she did not seek further help or highlight a further deterioration in her
mental state to her Family. She ended her life
and there was no
evidence of third-party involvement in her death. No prescription or other drugs
or alcohol were detected, and she was not therefore compliant with her
antidepressant medication. A handwritten letter was found in her bedroom,
expressing the extent of her mental decline and her hopes for her Family
following her death.
5 CORONER’S CONCERNS
Ms Ellerby’s mental health care was transferred from the Home
Treatment Team, Surrey and Borders Partnership NHS Foundation Trust
(“Surrey and Borders”), to the care of her General Practitioner at Madeira
Medical Practice, West Byfleet, Surrey on 13th December 2024. Ms Ellerby
did not follow up her care with the GP, and had never been seen at the
Practice as she had recently relocated. She had no contact with mental
health or medical clinicians prior to her death on 4th January 2025, and the
onus was on her to arrange an appointment with the GP. Toxicology
showed she had not been compliant with her anti-depressant medication.
Surrey and Borders and Madeira Medical Practice have both recognised
the risk of the transfer period from secondary to primary mental health
care in vulnerable patients, and have put in hand changes within their
organisations to address this. However, as highlighted by Madeira
Medical Practice: “there is no expectation from NHS England or mental
health services to following up these patients urgently”, and therefore no
universal guidance for all mental health trusts and GP practices.
There are no safety netting guidelines or policies in place to ensure
vulnerable mental health patients are followed up within a timely period
by primary care services on transfer from secondary services, nor
expectations on secondary services to ensure this has been undertaken by
primary care services. Patients are therefore being relied upon to ensure
this takes place, at a time when they are particularly vulnerable.
The MATTERS OF CONCERN are:
- Vulnerable patients are often transferred back to primary care by
RT4563
2
mental health services for their onward care, which is effected by
way of a Discharge Letter;
- NHS England has not provided any guidance in respect of
expectation for follow up by primary care services when this
transfer takes place;
In the absence of such guidance, the onus is on vulnerable patients
to ensure they follow up their care with their GP, without any
safety netting in place should they fail to do so.
-
Consideration should be given as to whether any steps can be taken to
address the above concerns.
6 ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN
In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I
believe that the people listed in paragraph one above have the power to
take such action.
7 YOUR RESPONSE
You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of its date; I
may extend that period on request.
Your response must contain details of action taken or proposed to be
taken, setting out the timetable for such action. Otherwise you must
explain why no action is proposed.
8 COPIES
I have sent a copy of this report to the following:
1. See name in paragraph 1 above
2.
3. Surrey and Borders Partnership NHS Foundation Trust
4. Madeira Medical Practice, The Health Centre, Madeira Road, West
Byfleet, Surrey KT14 6DH
5. The Chief Coroner
In addition to this report, I am 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 at the time of your response, about the release or
RT4563
3
the publication of your response by the Chief Coroner.
Signed:
ANNA LOXTON
DATED this 14th day of November 2025
RT4563
4
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.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Women’s Health and Mental Health 39 Victoria Street London SW1H 0EU 9 February 2026 HM Coroner Anna Loxton HM Coroner’s Court Surrey Station Approach Woking GU22 7AP Dear Ms Loxton, Thank you for the Regulation 28 report of 14 November 2025 sent to the Department of Health and Social Care about the death of Suzanne Julia Ellerby. I am replying as the Minister with responsibility for Patient Safety, Women’s Health and Mental Health. Firstly, I would like to say how saddened I was to read of the circumstances of Suzanne’s death and I offer my sincere condolences to their family and loved ones. The circumstances your report describes are very concerning and I am grateful to you for bringing these matters to my attention. Please accept my sincere apologies for the delay in responding to this matter. Thank you for the additional time provided to the department to provide a response to the concerns raised in the report. The report raises concerns over vulnerable patients often being transferred back to primary care by secondary mental health services for their onward care, which is affected by way of a discharge letter. Your concern was that NHS England has not provided any guidance in respect of expectations for follow up by primary care services when this transfer of care takes place. As such, the onus is on vulnerable patients to ensure they follow up their care with their GP, without any safety netting in place should they fail to do so. In preparing this response, my officials have made enquiries with NHS England to ensure we adequately address your concerns. NHS England has assured the Department that they continue to support local systems to improve the quality, safety and continuity of care for people with mental health needs who require support from secondary mental health services. As part of this work, NHS England has developed draft guidance, the Personalised Care Framework, which sets out the core expectations for care and support for people accessing NHS-commissioned community mental health, crisis and inpatient services, as well as those receiving support through integrated primary care and the voluntary, community and social enterprise sector. This guidance has been shared in draft form with systems to support early adoption. The Personalised Care Framework sets out core principles, including that people using specialist mental health services should have a care and support plan that is kept up to date and reflects their needs at that time; that there should be a clearly identified professional within the service with responsibility for the individual’s care and support plan and for developing a trusted therapeutic relationship; and that care and support plans should be reviewed when circumstances change. The framework also makes clear that individuals should be able to re-access support promptly where their mental health deteriorates, including following a period of stability. The guidance further emphasises the responsibility of services to support safe and effective transitions, including between secondary and primary care. Where a person is transferring away from a service, the transferring service is expected to be satisfied that appropriate arrangements are in place and that the receiving service is ready to continue delivery of the care and support plan. In relation to your second concern, where secondary mental health services consider that there may be a risk that a patient will not engage with primary care, services should take appropriate steps to follow the patient up and support their engagement. Patients with significant ongoing risk should not be discharged solely to primary care, and decisions about discharge should be informed by individual clinical judgement and personalised risk assessment, rather than the application of rigid criteria. As set out above, the Personalised Care Framework also makes clear that people who have received specialist mental health support should be able to re-access help quickly when needed, including where their mental health deteriorates or where they have been transferred between services. The guidance further highlights the importance of involving family members or carers, where appropriate, in the development of care and support plans. These plans should include clear information on what to do if a person’s mental health worsens, including how to access appropriate support and the signs that may indicate a potential relapse. 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. I hope this response is helpful. Thank you for bringing these concerns to my attention. Yours sincerely,
Ms Anna Loxton,
HM Assistant Coroner
Surrey Coroner’s Court
Station Approach,
Woking
GU22 7AP
National Medical Director
NHS England
Wellington House
133-155 Waterloo Road
London
SE1 8UG
26th January 2026
Dear Coroner,
Re: Regulation 28 Report to Prevent Future Deaths – Suzanne Julie Ellerby
who died on 4th January 2025.
Thank you for your Report to Prevent Future Deaths (hereafter “Report”) dated 14th
November 2025 concerning the death of Suzanne Julie Ellerby on 4th January 2025.
In advance of responding to the specific concerns raised in your Report, I would like
to express my deep condolences to Suzanne’s family and loved ones. NHS England
is keen to assure the family and yourself that the concerns raised about Suzanne’s
care have been listened to and reflected upon.
I am grateful for the further time granted to respond to your Report, and I apologise for
any anguish this delay may have caused Suzanne’s family or friends. I realise that
responses to Coroners’ Reports can form part of the important process of family and
friends coming to terms with what has happened to their loved ones, and I appreciate
this will have been an incredibly difficult time for them.
Your Report raised that vulnerable patients are often transferred back to primary care
by secondary mental health services for their onward care, which is effected by way
of a discharge letter. Your concern was that NHS England has not provided any
guidance in respect of expectations for follow up by primary care services when this
transfer of care takes place. As such, the onus is on vulnerable patients to ensure they
follow up their care with their GP, without any safety netting in place should they fail
to do so.
Transfer of care by mental health services
NHS England continues to support systems to improve care for people with mental
health problems needing help from secondary mental health services. NHS England
has drafted guidance called the Personalised Care Framework (PCF), that sets out
the core aspects of care for people who require help from secondary or integrated
primary health services, the Voluntary Community and Social Enterprise (VCSE) and
secondary care mental health services. It has been shared as a draft with systems to
facilitate early adoption.
The PCF sets out the core principles that all people using NHS commissioned
community mental health, crisis and inpatient services should:
• have a care and support plan that is current and that is reflective of the needs
of the person at that point;
• have a person within the service responsible for their care and support plan and
for developing a trusted therapeutic relationship;
• be able to have their care and support plan reviewed when things change, as
well as being able to quickly re-access help when they need to (such as when
their mental health deteriorates following a period of stability).
The PCF guidance will also emphasise the responsibility of all services to support
effective transitions, including between secondary and primary care, and that where a
person is transferring away from a service, the transferring service should be satisfied
that the receiving service are ready to continue the care and support plan.
Primary Care Follow Up Guidance
If secondary mental health services feel that there is any risk that a patient may not
engage with their GP, such as where the patient has relocated and is not known to a
GP practice, then it would be important that they follow the patient up and support the
patient to engage with the GP. However, patients with significant risk should not be
discharged back to their GP - this is difficult to define with criteria and is best based
on personal risk assessment.
As set out above, the PCF stipulates that every patient seen by specialist mental health
services should be able to quickly re-access help when they need to (such as when
their mental health deteriorates following a period of stability), or when transferred to
another service.
The PCF also makes it clear that family members should be involved in the
development of the care and support plan – which should include details of what to do
if a person’s mental health is deteriorating, for example how to access appropriate
help and support, and should include signs of a potential relapse.
The PCF states:
Where a person is transferring away from a service, that service has a responsibility
to support the transition, sharing important information including how best to engage
the person, the care and support plan including relapse indicators, risk assessment
and safety plan and formulation. The transferring service should be satisfied the
receiving service are ready to continue the care and support plan.
Where a patient is being discharged from the community mental health service to
primary care, a care planning meeting should take place which should include the
patient (and/or a family member, carer or support network member where the person
lacks capacity) and their GP. At the point of transition, the patient and GP should be
provided with written confirmation of:
the reason for the change in care;
•
• a discharge plan that details how they can re-access support from the
•
community mental health service;
information about other available community support which may be relevant for
the patient;
• details of ways to contact the service – including a working hours telephone
number and email address;
• a copy of the patient’s updated care and support plan and other relevant plans
developed as part of their care and treatment;
• medicines reconciliation (a list of a patient’s current medications).
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
Suzanne, 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
See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching Surrey and Borders Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, 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.