Canon Frost

Dear Sir; RE: Inquest Touching Upon the Death of Canon Frost We write in relation to the report you made at Ipswich Coroner's Court under Rule 28 of The Coroners (Investigations) Regulations 2013 ` following the inquest into the death of Canon Brian Frost on 10th September 2018_ We are sorry for any in providing this response and are grateful for the extensions that you have kindly provided we say at the outset that this response to your Rule 28 report to prevent future deaths is provided by and on behalf of the Northampton Diocese and not Cardinal Vincent Nichols, one of the parties to whom the report was directed While we are aware that you directed your regulation 28 report to Cardinal Vincent Nichols, we respectfully suggest that the appropriate party to respond is the Diocese of Northampton and not Cardinal Nichols. We say that for the following reasons. The concerns you expressed relate to the way in which an individual diocese here the Diocese of Northampton conducted itself in relation to the well-being of retired priests occupying grace and favour properties As was explained at the Inquest; these types of arrangements are made on diocese by diocese basis and no overarching policy of wider applicability exists The fact that there is no such overarching policy is an inevitable consequence of the Way in which the Catholic Church in England and Wales is constituted: each diocese has and maintains its OWI individual arrangements. While the Archbishop of Westminster (Cardinal Nichols) is, as & matter of custom; elected President of the Catholic Bishops' Conference of England and Wales, and s0 is the de facto spokesman fof the Catholic Church in England &nd Wales, he heads the Diocese of Westminster only: This is & distinct and separate diocese the Diocese of Northampton. It has its own approach towards the provision of grace and favouI The Northampton Roman Catholic Diocesan Trust Registercd Charity Number 234091 delay May being from

properties and welfare care for retired priests There has been no suggestion that the way in which the Diocese of Westminster discharged its function was lacking: The Bishop of Northampton is Bishop Peter Doyle; who was ordained as the twelfth Bishop of Northampton on Tuesday 28th June 2005 and is the spiritual head of the Diocese. The Diocese also operates by and through a number of separate departments that include: Administrative and Consultative and Vocations Diocesan Tribunal Ecumenism Education and Schools Finance and Property Human Resources Liturgy Commission Pastoral Ministry Office Pastoral Services While individual dioceses inevitably operate in a similar manner; their manner of operation is not identical and all have discretion in relation to the way in which attend to (for example) the welfare of retired priests. Of course, all dioceses are subject to canon law, but canon law is not prescriptive about the way in which arrangements such a8 the provision of maintenance and residence are devised and implemented We this is satisfactory and explains why this response is provided by the Diocese of Northampton and not Cardinal Nichols. Cardinal Nichols is interested and concerned about these matters, and our response to you will be shared with him. We will also endeavour to share the concerns that have arisen from this case, and our response to them;, across the other dioceses in England and Wales. By doing this, we that all necessary lessons may be learned by those to whom are applicable As regards the circumstances of this sad case: As you know Canon Brian Frost was ordained in 1950, served at St Joseph's Bedford the Cathedral, Leighton Buzzard, St Joseph's Luton for 14 years; Rushden for 11 years, then Kettering for three years before a brief spell at St Patricks Corby, where he retired in 1995. Asa retired clergyman he was provided with a grace and favour property at As you will appreciate, members of the are not employees and therefore the Diocese did not owe a under section 2(1) of the Health and at Work etc Act 1974 'HSWA 1974'). Even if any such duty is considered to have been owed, it is highly unlikely that it would have extended to his personal residence, where no work activities took place_ Of course , the Diocese accepts that it also has wider duties under (principally) section 3(1) HSWA 1974, which is the to ensure that non-employees are not exposed to risks to their health and safety from the conduct of an undertaking: The Diocese takes the view that the nature of its undertaking in connection with Canon Frost was limited indeed, there is strong argument for saying it was exercising no legal undertaking in relation to Canon Frost; Notwithstanding this, we will approach the matter on the basis that it was operating limited undertaking, which we suggest was no more than that of private landlord Or de facto landiord We say de facto landlord because no formal tenancy or licence was entered into as the property was provided on a grace and favour basis, but the Diocese accepts it was required to discharge the basic statutory functions of a private landlord These were principally the safe installation and maintenance of gas and electrical equipment; it did this: Northampton Roman Catholic Diocesan Trust Registered Charity Number 234091 Clergy they hope Having said this; hope they from clergy duty Safety duty arising The

Consistent with canon law and convention, the Diocese provided Canon Frost with a grace and favour residence for his natural life: It was not acting O purporting to act as & Care Retirement Home Or other supported provider. This was not its undertaking or function, nor did it have an obligation under canon law or other provision to exercise this undertaking or function_ As a landlord (OT de facto landlord) it had few other legal obligations, whether through the English law of real property or canon law in relation to the interior condition 0f the property. In particular; the Diocese does not accept it was in breach of any repairing obligations it may have had, certainly in the absence of specific indication that there was & problem with the floor tiles any It also had no other legal obligations in Ielation to the welfare of Canon Frost merely because he was retired priest of the Diocese; While it did ensure that & yearly pastoral visit was made to it was not thereby assuming 3 day to day responsibility to safeguard his welfare while resident at As you know certain other financial provision was made but this did not with it an obligation to ensure, for example; that nothing about the internal fabric of the house presented & to day risk Its duties towards securing the welfare of Canon Frost were in fact no more extensive and probably less extensive than those of the social services We are aware that you have included the Local Authority in your Rule 28 report: As was noted at the inquest; the Local Authority was fully aware of Canon Frost' $ health following his admission into the James Paget Hospital for the cataract operation and undertook a home assessmeng he was not in need of carers_ We are conscious of the fact that in asserting what the Diocese says were its legal obligations, it may appear harsh or in some way lacking in compassion. This is not the case: the Diocese always seeks to act with care and compassion to all acting Or retired and has regard for their pastoral care_ In essessing whether the Diocese did all it ought reasonably to have done in relation to Frost' s welfare; the Coroner is aware that the property at was Canon Frost's sister' $ and he was known to have strong family support in the area Wrignally accepted that Canon Frost was becoming frailer and less capable of for himself; the Diocese was entitled to think that any issues affecting the safety of his accommodation Would have been raised by Canon Frost'$ family, ifnot by Canon Frost himself If issues about his accommodation had been raised, there is no doubt the Diocese would have addressed them_ This would have been done by the Property and Finance Department or Northampton Priest's fund, which is separate fund. No such was ever raised, either by Canon Frost or by his family. The only request received from Canon Frost was in relation to payment for & cataract operation Which Was paid for from the Priest*s fund, said all of this, the Diocese acknowledges that @ state of affairs arose in connection with the property at that was unsatisfactory, and it will take all practicable steps to ensure that lessons are learned, and similar events do not occur in the future. The Diocese already taken steps to ensure that these events do not reoccur; as follows: The Diocese has reviewed its procedures for supporting retired Priests living in Diocesan accommodation; All Priests will continue to receive at least annual visits from the Diocesan Welfare Officer; but the Welfare Officer will bejoined on those visits by one of Diocesan Surveyors; The Northampton Roman Catholic Diocesan Trust Registered Charity Number 234091 Home; living him, bring day issues finding = yet clergy Canon house caring issue Having has Clergy the

The Surveyor will carry out a full external and internal assessment of property' s fabric and condition; together with a Health and Assessment informed by the advice of the Welfare Officer about the health and mobility of Priest; At the end of the survey the Surveyor , the Welfare Officer and the Priest will discuss the of the survey . repair works noted as needed Or recommended from a property or health and safety perspective will be agreed with the Priest and organised by the Surveyor; who wili agree with the Priest suitable times for access and will manage and approve the works The costs will be borne by the Diocese; Should the survey identify works that might assist a Priest in his occupation of the property (handrails, grab rails etc) the Surveyor and Welfare Officer will strongly recommend to the Priest that these are carried out and, if he agrees, the Surveyor will organise these as detailed above; IE the Priest does not agree to the recommended works then the Welfare Officer will escalate the issue to the Vicar General or Bishop to agree the next steps; and At the end of visit the Priest will be left cards showing office hours and out of office hours for both tle Welfare Officer and Surveyor in the event that property repairs become nceded We that all of this is satisfactory and addresses the concerns that prompted you to issue a Rule 28 Report;