Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2025

Timothy Reading

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2026-0101, written 21 Nov 2025. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report21 Nov 2025
Reference2026-0101
DeceasedTimothy Reading
CoronerJames Puzey
Coroner areaWorcestershire
CategorySuicide (from 2015)
Sourcejudiciary.uk record · original PDF
Responses published2

The report

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

ANNEX A

REGULATION 28:  REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS (1)

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

REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE
DEATHS THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO:

1. The Chief Executive of the Birmingham and Solihull Mental

Health Foundation Trust (“BSMHFT”)
2. The Chief Executive of NHS England

1 CORONER

I am James Puzey, assistant coroner, for the coroner area of
Worcestershire

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.
INVESTIGATION and INQUEST

3

On 20 January 2025, Senior Coroner, David Reid, commenced an
investigation into the death of Timothy Thomas Reading. The
investigation concluded at the end of the inquest on 12 November 2025.
The conclusion of the inquest was that death was due to suicide and the
medical cause of death was hanging.
4 CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH

Timothy  Thomas  Reading  died  on  9  January  2025  at  54  Red  Lion  St
Alvechurch. 

 He was 48 years old. He had a history of mental illness dating
back to his 20s. in 2023 he was arrested for an offence of stalking under s.4A
of  the  Protection  from  Harassment  Act  1997.  Initially  he  was  in  prison but
later transferred to hospital in December 2023. Ultimately he pleaded guilty
and he was made subject of a hospital order pursuant to the provisions of
s.37  the  MHA  1983.  He  was  an  inpatient  on  the  intensive  care  ward  at
BSMHFT’s  Meadowcroft  facility then  on  the  acute  ward  at  Mary  Seacole
House in Birmingham. He was released back into the Community under the
provisions  of  a  CTO  dated  9.10.24.  A  planning  meeting  was  held at  Mary
Seacole House on 20.8.24 to formulate plans to support Tim pursuant to the
provisions  of  s.117  of  MHA.  On  22.10.24  Tim  was  discharged  to  the
Bromsgrove CMHT. They had not been involved in planning support for Tim
with BSMHFT. They and Tim’s GP asked for a copy of the s.117 support plan
from  BSMHFT but  did  not  receive  one.  The  minutes  of  the  meeting  of  20
August 2025 referred to a plan but no plan was drafted and what was being
proposed in the meeting was general, non-specific and inaccurate as to who
would be responsible for mental health provision in the community.

1

 I found that there was no s.117 plan created; also,

  That  such  a  plan  was  necessary  to  chart  Tim’s  reintegration

into community living.

 The handling of the transition for Tim from inpatient to care in

Worcestershire was slow and disjointed;

 There was no handover between the responsible clinicians in

Birmingham and Bromsgrove;

Those  who  knew  him  best,  namely  his  family, concluded  that  he  was  not
coping and they told BSMHT in November 2024. Their view, which I accept,
was that Tim struggled without meaningful activity and structure.

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) The absence of a formal documented
s.117 plan agreed by all those responsible for
a patient’s care and treatment upon
discharge into the Community from a lengthy
inpatient stay creates a risk of disjointed,
disorganized and inadequate support for
vulnerable people suffering serious mental
health conditions. This, in turn, may cause
them to feel unsupported and helpless.
BSMHFT did not provide a Plan despite
requests to do so. S.117 is intended to
ensure that patients receive planned and
structured support tailored to their
requirements. Such planning was absent in
this case.
(2) I was informed by the Representative of BSMHFT that there is no national
guidance from the NHS or other source that explains what a s.117 plan should
address. If so, this represents a lacuna which gives rise to concern that mental
health providers are unclear as to the component elements for a s.117 plan
and the degree or depth of planning required for individual patients.

6 ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN

In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I
believe BSMHFT and the NHS generally have the power to take such
action.
YOUR RESPONSE

7

You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of
this report,

2

 namely by 16 January 2026. 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:
BSMHFT
HWHCT.
I have also sent it to the Chief Executive of NHS England as it raises a
matter of concern to the Health Service generally

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.
21 November 2025

James Puzey

9

3

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 Birmingham and Solihull Mh NHS Foundation Trust
Legal Department 
Uffculme Centre 
52 Queensbridge Road 
Moseley 
   Birmingham  
B13 8QY  

Date: 

    13 January 2026      

Mr J Puzey, 
HM Assistant Coroner, 
Coroner’s Court 
Martins Way 
STOURPORT ON SEVERN  
DY13 8UN 

Dear Mr Puzey, 

Prevention of Future Death report into the death of Timothy Thomas Reading 

Thank you for the Prevention of Future Deaths (PFD) Report dated 21 November 2025 in relation to the 
death of Mr Reading. I would like to take this opportunity to offer my sincere condolences to the family 
of Mr Reading at this very sad time. I would like to begin by offering assurances that the Trust is a learning 
organisation and when we identify care which could have been improved, we take actions to improve 
care for other patients in the future.  

I note from your PFD report there were two aspects of care you have raised concern with, one relating 
to the trust. We will therefore aim to respond to the issue raised below: 

The absence of a formal documented s.117 plan agreed by all those responsible for a patient’s 
care and treatment upon discharge into the Community from a lengthy inpatient stay creates a 
risk of disjointed, disorganized and inadequate support for vulnerable people suffering serious 
mental health conditions. This, in turn, may cause them to feel unsupported and helpless. 

The Trust has now looked at the inpatient care and CMHT care around the s.117 plan on the back of 
your concerns. Section 117 of the Mental Health Act 1983 places a joint duty on the NHS Integrated Care 
Board and local authority to provide aftercare services for individuals detained under certain sections of 
the Act following discharge. 

This duty is not automatic; it only applies where there are ongoing health or social care needs arising 
from the mental disorder and aimed at reducing the risk of relapse or readmission. The Trust has a form 
within  Rio  which  clearly  sets  out  the  relevant  areas  for  the  s.117  meeting  and  ensures  that  both 
healthcare  and  social  care  are  signed  up  to  the plan. I attach  for ease a  copy  of  a blank  form  which 
shows all the relevant areas in one place and will ensure comprehensive plans in an easily accessible 
and shareable document. All staff in Acute care have been reminded to use this form in the future and 
this has also been discussed at team meetings.   

In respect of the CMHT transfer to the new CMHT,  the Clinical Directors for CMHTs will be raising the 
case and reminding staff of the need to provide verbal and written handover to external Trusts receiving 
service user subject to  s.117 aftercare at the Community  Clinical Governance Committee on 27th Jan 

8

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                               
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 2026. They will also be formally writing to all the Consultant Psychiatrists outlining that this must be done, 
to ensure that receiving teams are fully aware of the s.117 requirements during the handover period and 
there is therefore consistency in care.  

I hope that you will now be assured that the s.117 process is now robust within the organisation. If you 
require any further information, please do not hesitate to contact us.  

Yours sincerely 

Chief Executive 
BSMHFT
Response from NHS England
Mr James Puzey 
HM Assistant Coroner for Worcestershire  
Worcestershire Coroner’s Court 
The Civic 
Martin’s Way 
Stourport-on-Severn 
Worcestershire 
DY13 8UN 

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

7 April 2026 

Dear Coroner, 

Re: Regulation 28 Report to Prevent Future Deaths – Timothy Thomas Reading 
who died on 9 January 2025.  

Thank  you  for  your  Report  to  Prevent  Future  Deaths  (hereafter  “Report”)  dated  21 
November 2025 and received by NHS England on 24 February 2026, concerning the 
death of Timothy Thomas Reading on 9 January 2025. In advance of responding to 
the  specific  concerns  raised  in  your  Report,  I  would  like  to  express  my  deep 
condolences to Timothy’s family and loved ones. NHS England is keen to assure the 
family and yourself that the concerns raised about Timothy’s care have been listened 
to and reflected upon.   

Your Report raised concerns around the absence of formal documented Section 117 
plan  agreed  upon  by  all  those  responsible  for  a  patient’s  care  and  treatment  upon 
discharge  into  the  community  from  a  lengthy  inpatient  stay.  This  creates  a  risk  of 
disjointed,  disorganised  and  inadequate  support  for  vulnerable  people  suffering 
serious  mental  health  conditions  which  may  cause  them  to  feel  unsupported  and 
helpless. Your report also raised concerns around lack of national guidance from the 
NHS  or  other  sources  that  explain  what  a  Section  117  plan  should  address.  This 
represents a gap which gives rise to concern that mental health providers are unclear 
as  to  the  component  elements  for  a  Section  117  plan  and  the  degree  or  depth  of 
planning required for individual patients.  

NHS England Mental Health colleagues have advised that there is clear guidance set 
out in the Mental Health Act Code of Practice on Section 117 aftercare which includes 
planning  based  on  the  person’s  individual  needs.  It  includes  examples  such  as 
ensuring the person’s wider social, cultural and spiritual needs are met and specifies 
that after care should aim to support people in regaining or enhancing their skills, or 
learning new skills,  in order to  cope  with  life  outside  of hospital.  Before  deciding  to 
discharge or grant more than a very short-term leave of absence to a patient, or to 
place a patient onto a Community Treatment Order (CTO), the responsible clinician 
should  ensure  that  the  patient’s  needs  for  after-care  have  been  fully  assessed, 
discussed with the patient (and their carers, where appropriate) and addressed in their 
care  plan.  If  the  patient  is  being  given  leave  for  only  a  short  period,  a  less 

                                                                                                                       
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 comprehensive review may be sufficient, but the arrangements for the patient’s care 
should still be properly recorded 

In addition to this, the Community Mental Health Framework states that ‘every person 
who  requires  support,  care  and  treatment  in  the  community  should  have  a  co-
produced and personalised care plan that takes into account all of their needs, as well 
as  their  rights  under  the  Care  Act  and  Section  117  of  the  Mental  Health  Act  when 
required’.  

There is also statutory discharge guidance which covers Section 117 care. This states 
that  ‘a  personalised  care  and  support  plan,  as  a  result  of  a  ‘what  matters  to  me’ 
conversation with the patient, should be prepared and available to support discharge 
with  input,  where  relevant,  from  family  members,  chosen  carers  and  relevant 
professionals.’ This is underpinned by the NHS England guidance on comprehensive 
model  of  personalised  care.  NHS  bodies  and  local  authorities  in  England  have  a 
statutory duty to have regard to the statutory discharge guidance as well as the Mental 
Health Act Code of Practice.  

We  note  that  your  report  has  also  been  addressed  to  the  Trust  who  will  be  better 
placed  to  respond  to  the  concerns  raised  around  the  absence  of  Section  117  plan 
provided by the Trust despite it being requested.   

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 
Timothy, 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 James Puzey

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.