Skip to content
recurance

Barbara Woodman

22 Dec 2023 · Coroner Darren Stewart · Surrey

This report repeats 2 earlier warnings, and was raised again 1 time later. See the linked reports.

The coroner's concerns

  1. 1. lack of unified record keeping system

    “Although I found there was no causal link between any act or omission on behalf of those involved in the care of Ms. [name redacted], either from a mental health perspective, or by any other state agent, several matters have given me cause for concern.”
  2. 2. SCARF process out of hours

    “The use of the SCARF process during out of hours to provide timely and effective passage of information in relation to concerns for vulnerable persons in the community.”

Linked reports

Repeats an earlier warningLillian Robinson26 Jan 2014 · 9 years 11 months earlier
Closely relatedConfidence 0.80 · moderate

Earlier report

“Lack of communication between hospital and home re mental capacity assessment”
Original on judiciary.uk ↗

This report

“staff speaking with [REDACTED] on these occasions failed to think laterally or innovatively as to how to collect important, relevant collateral history”
Full chain: Lack of communication between hospital and care home regarding mental capacity
Repeats an earlier warningDaniel Maher18 Apr 2017 · 6 years 8 months earlier
Identical hazardConfidence 0.90 · high

Earlier report

“The court was told that mental health professionals cannot access patient information which is held on the computerised systems of mental health services outside their own county.”
Original on judiciary.uk ↗

This report

“The ability of mental health clinicians to gain a complete picture of Ms. [name redacted] medical history was hampered by the fact that the information management systems holding these records at her GP practice was not accessible to secondary mental health services.”
Full chain: Inaccessible patient information across county boundaries
Raised again laterHelen Kerr18 Sept 2024 · 9 months later
Identical hazardConfidence 0.95 · high

This report

“The use of the SCARF process during out of hours to provide timely and effective passage of information in relation to concerns for vulnerable persons in the community.”

Later report

“(3) The SCARF process does not enable information sharing between the Police, Mental Health Agencies and Surrey Adult Safeguarding out of hours.”
Original on judiciary.uk ↗
Full chain: Inadequate out-of-hours information sharing in SCARF process

Responses

  • Built with
  • NVIDIA Nemotron Nano, Super and Ultra
  • Nebius Token Factory inference
  • Qwen3 Embedding 8B on Token Factory
  • Tavily follow-up web search
  • Postgres and pgvector search
  • Next.js site

Source: Prevention of Future Deaths reports and responses published by the Courts and Tribunals Judiciary at judiciary.uk. Crown copyright, used under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Data updated 26 Oct 2026.

A link shows that a similar concern was raised again, not why. It is not a finding about any organisation or person. Methodology and responsible use · Report an error