Staff unaware of leave policy requirements
Sussex Partnership NHS Trust received 3 coroners' reports about this hazard between 31 Jan 2014 and 26 May 2026.
They came from 3 different coroners in 3 coroner areas. A similar concern was raised again 2 times after the first warning.
A published response was found for 1 of the 2 earlier reports, stating 1 specific action.
The story, report by report
Spacing grows with the time between reports.
“During the course of the evidence it was shown that there a lack of understanding by staff of the Trust's Leave for Non detained patients Policy.”
Original on judiciary.uk ↗ No published response from Sussex Partnership NHS Trust was found for this report.
- 2 months later
“Leave was considered first on 1.11.2013 when Mrs. [name redacted] was on 15 minute observations.”
Original on judiciary.uk ↗ Sussex Partnership NHS Trust responded, stating 1 specific action.Response (PDF) ↗
“We have since reinforced with staff that should these quite extraordinary circumstances arise again then a retrospective note must be completed.”
- 12 years 2 months laterClosely relatedConfidence 0.90 · higha different coroner
“I am concerned that s17 leave is being authorised by staff in ignorance of the leave conditions. In this particular case, the responsible clinician granted leave on the 13th of February 2025, a condition being that [the deceased] had to test negative for drug use before leave was allowed.”
Original on judiciary.uk ↗ Repeated from the earlier report:leavestaff
Sussex Partnership NHS Trust responded.Response (PDF) ↗
- All reports to Sussex Partnership NHS Trust
Each row is one judged link between an earlier and a later report. Open a row to read both quotes, found word for word in the originals.
2014 → 2026Kristian Allen12 years 4 months after Ryan Chapman · different coronerClosely relatedConfidence 0.90 · high
Closely relatedConfidence 0.90 · highBoth reports highlight staff not understanding or applying the trust's leave policies correctly. The earlier report cites a lack of understanding of the Leave for Non‑detained patients Policy, while the later report notes staff authorising leave despite being unaware of specific leave conditions.
Ryan Chapman · 31 Jan 2014
“During the course of the evidence it was shown that there a lack of understanding by staff of the Trust's Leave for Non detained patients Policy.”
Original on judiciary.uk ↗ Kristian Allen · 26 May 2026
“I am concerned that s17 leave is being authorised by staff in ignorance of the leave conditions. In this particular case, the responsible clinician granted leave on the 13th of February 2025, a condition being that [the deceased] had to test negative for drug use before leave was allowed.”
Original on judiciary.uk ↗ 2014 → 2026Kristian Allen12 years 2 months after Danuta Corbett · different coronerClosely relatedConfidence 0.90 · high
Closely relatedConfidence 0.90 · highBoth reports highlight failures in the leave process where staff do not follow or are unaware of required checks and documentation.
Danuta Corbett · 3 Apr 2014
“Leave was considered first on 1.11.2013 when Mrs. [name redacted] was on 15 minute observations.”
Original on judiciary.uk ↗ Kristian Allen · 26 May 2026
“staff are unaware of leave conditions and this is not being properly monitored.”
Original on judiciary.uk ↗ Stated action in the response to the earlier report
“We have since reinforced with staff that should these quite extraordinary circumstances arise again then a retrospective note must be completed.”
No published response from Sussex Partnership NHS Trust was found for this report.
Stated action
“We have since reinforced with staff that should these quite extraordinary circumstances arise again then a retrospective note must be completed.”
No specific action could be extracted with a verified quote.
- Each report's concerns were extracted by Nemotron 3 Nano on Nebius Token Factory, each with a quote copied from the report.
- Concerns from reports to Sussex Partnership NHS Trust at least six months apart were compared by meaning (Qwen3 embeddings) and wording (TF-IDF).
- The closest pairs were judged by Nemotron 3 Super with reasoning on. Only identical or closely related, with confidence of at least 0.70, are shown.
- Every quote was checked by code as an exact substring of the original text. Names of staff and family are redacted, and the deceased are named by report title only.
| Link | Meaning | Wording | Judge | Coroner |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2014 → 2026 | 0.71 | 0.12 | Closely related · 0.90 | different |
| 2014 → 2026 | 0.63 | 0.11 | Closely related · 0.90 | different |
Judge model: nvidia/nemotron-3-super-120b-a12b. How Nemotron did the work · Full methodology.
Next
Other chains for Sussex Partnership NHS Trust
This shows that a similar concern was raised again after an earlier report. It does not say why, and it is not a finding about any organisation or person. To report an error, see the corrections route.