Timothy Reading
PFD Report
Response Pending
Ref: 2026-0101
70 days past deadline · No identified published response
Response Status
Responses
0 of 2
56-Day Deadline
20 Apr 2026
70 days past deadline — no identified published response
About PFD responses
Organisations named in PFD reports must respond within 56 days explaining what actions they are taking.
Source: Courts and Tribunals Judiciary
Coroner’s Concerns
(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.
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.
Report Sections
Investigation and Inquest
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.
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.
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.
Similar PFD Reports
Reports sharing organisations, categories, or themes with this PFD
Related Inquiry Recommendations
Public inquiry recommendations addressing similar themes
Prevent discharge of hospitalised children with concerns until home is safe
Laming Inquiry
Care and discharge planning
Require consultant or paediatrician permission for discharging children with protection concerns.
Laming Inquiry
Care and discharge planning
Require documented future care plan for discharging children with protection concerns.
Laming Inquiry
Care and discharge planning
Ensure identified GP for children with deliberate harm concerns discharged from hospital.
Laming Inquiry
Care and discharge planning
Require effective communication among healthcare professionals to avoid conflicting patient advice
Bristol Heart Inquiry
Conflicting mental health care plans
Establish comprehensive counselling and support services as integral to patient care
Bristol Heart Inquiry
Care and discharge planning
Require every trust to provide a professional bereavement service and online information
Bristol Heart Inquiry
Care and discharge planning
Data sourced from Courts and Tribunals Judiciary under the Open Government Licence.