Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2026
Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2026-0084, written 9 Feb 2026. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.
| Date of report | 9 Feb 2026 |
|---|---|
| Reference | 2026-0084 |
| Deceased | Brody O’Brien |
| Coroner | Emma Mather |
| Coroner area | Lancashire and Blackburn with Darwen |
| Category | Child Death (from 2015) |
| Source | judiciary.uk record · original PDF |
| Responses published | 2 |
Text extracted from the PDF text layer. Reproduced verbatim, including the scan's own layout.
REGULATION 28: REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO: 1. Rossendale Borough Council 2. 3. Health and Safety Executive 1 CORONER I am Emma Mather, area coroner, for the coroner area of Lancashire and Blackburn with Darwen. 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 9th October 2025 I commenced an investigation into the death of Brody O'Brien, aged 12. The investigation concluded at the end of the inquest on the 21st January 2026. The conclusion of the inquest was: Narrative conclusion: On the 7th October 2025 Brody O'BRIEN died at Market Street in Rochdale from hanging. on He did not intend to cause his death in doing so. 4 CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH The brief circumstances are that on the 7th October 2025 Brody found hanging. Brody had researched the that that this , from which he was later beforehand and the court heard is regularly used by young people as a place to meet. The area of the itself it is treacherous and the access point used by is not well secured and the the emergency responders was dangerous. Despite resuscitation efforts, Brody sadly was pronounced deceased. 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 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. – (1) Brody was able to access the to secure a ligature. as it remains unsecured and use the (2) Emergency services found access to the difficult and treacherous. They had to scale a wall and once inside, the ground was very uneven and dangerous posing a significant risk. , particularly with their equipment, 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. 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 Chief Coroner and to the following Interested Persons: Lancashire County Council, and to the Local Safeguarding Board. I have also sent it to the Lancashire Constabulary who may find it useful or of interest. (Brody's mother), (Brody's father), 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 other 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. 9 9th February 2026 Emma Mather
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.
Lancashire and Blackburn with Darwen Coroner
Coroner’s Court
2 Faraday Drive,
Fulwood,
Preston,
Lancashire
PR2 9NB
For the attention of Emma Mather, Area Coroner
Health and Safety
Executive
INSPECTION
Inspection Unit 2 Group 8
1.G. Redgrave Court
Merton Road
Bootle
Merseyside
L20 7HS
Tel:
http://www.hse.gov.uk/
1st April 2026
Dear Madam,
HSE Response to Regulation 28 Prevention of Future Deaths Notification
I refer to the recent inquest into the death of Brody O’Brien and your above notification.
HSE does not have any enforcement responsibility for the disused mill as there is no ongoing work activity.
However, the mill building is bordered on two sides by a site under the control of Spenside Developments
Ltd which is enforced by HSE. We inspected the site in November 2025 and took enforcement action with
regard to improvements to site security. A further visit was made on 17th March 2026 to re-assess site
security and the necessary improvements to the site fencing have been made.
Liaison with legal and planning representatives from Rossendale Borough Council took place to share
concerns and ensure that both organisations are working together in an effective and cooperative manner.
Representatives from Rossendale Borough Council were in attendance on 17th March and advice has been
shared with regard to further securing access to the mill building.
Please let me know if you have any queries with regard to the above.
Yours faithfully,
HM Inspector of Health and Safety
Coroner Emma Mather Area Coroner Lancashire and Blackburn with Darwen 1 April 2026 Dear Coroner Mather LEGAL SERVICES The Business Centre, Futures Park, Bacup OL13 0BB Website: www.rossendale.gov.uk Name: THE COUNCIL DOES NOT ACCEPT SERVICE OF DOCUMENTS BY E-MAIL Our reference: Your reference: Brody O’Brien RE: Regulation 28 Report to Prevent Future Deaths – Brody O’Brien I write in response to the above and to outline the action taken by the Council to date in relation to access to Sunnyside Works. As requested, a copy of the report was sent to the owner of Sunnyside Works, together with a s29 Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982. This notice required to secure the building by either boarding all openings accessible from ground level or by provision of perimeter fencing to prevent access. informed the Council that his access to the land has been denied and prevented by the owner of the wider Albert Mill site and was therefore unable to comply with the notice. He further advises that an injunction application is due to be heard in Manchester on 7th April relating to the reinstatement of access and in the event that this is granted and access is reinstated, he will complete the works. The Council has not accepted this position. The Council has been in communication with the owner of the Albert Mill site and they have confirmed that they are agreeable to securing of the building. This has been relayed to that access is suitable or safe. This is also not accepted by the Council. taking access over their land to his property in order to carry out the but he does not accept The Council has been working alongside of the Health and Safety Executive and officers have spoken with him both over the telephone and in person on site. The HSE has no involvement with Sunnyside Works as this does not form part of the active site but assistance as to safety measures that could be taken on site. has been very helpful in offering advice and CLB /Z26-001449/00154253 The Council and its contractor attended on site during a coordinated visit with the HSE and the owner of Albert Mill with a view to obtaining quotes to carry out the securing works in default. All were in agreement that the site can be accessed safely in order for the works to be carried out albeit in a suitable vehicle. but he maintains his position that The Council has continued to liaise with he is presently unable to take access to do the works. The Council has given him until 7th April to carry out the works and in the event that he fails to do so, the Council’s contractor will be instructed to do the works and a land charge will be placed on the land until the monies are recovered from . He has been made aware of the likely costs of this which will include an administration fee for officers having to organise this. Officers have stressed the importance of this matter, particularly given the sad circumstances that this has arisen from, but this does not appear to have been given much regard by that he has a reasonable intention to carry out the works. and the Council is not satisfied The injunction may not be granted and even if it is, it may take some time for the matter to be fully resolved. relies on this in his attempt to demonstrate that he is prevented from taking the required steps and does not appear to take on board the need to prevent access to his building in order to prevent future deaths which is disappointing. The Council has offered to act as mediator between the two land owners but again, has not taken this up. The access issue has been a long running issue and the Council was aware of this when it was involved with the potential CPO of the site a number of years ago. The Council is also taking some additional steps to assist in the prevention of access by the removal of some trees on Council owned land in close proximity to the building and looking how further access from the footpath could be prevented but this would have to take into account current rights of way etc. The owner of the wider Albert Mill site has been helpful in his approach and has confirmed that we can take access over the land; we have certain rights of access in any event but this has been appreciated. The Council will also be requesting that they also take some action on their land to assist in the prevention of access and to this end the Council will keep you informed. I hope this is satisfactory and I will continue to keep you updated and confirm when the works are complete. If you do have any queries, please do not hesitate to contact me. Yours sincerely, Head of Legal (Monitoring Officer) CLB /Z26-001449/00154253
See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching Child Death (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.