The Vector

NHS investigates suspected access to tiger victim’s records

Yorkshire Ambulance Service says two employees may have accessed or attempted to access medical information without a legitimate reason.

Follow-up to: Yorkshire wildlife park to reopen after fatal tiger incident Thursday, 15 October 2026, 21:13

Yorkshire Ambulance Service is investigating suspected inappropriate access to the medical records of a man killed by a tiger. The concern involves two members of staff, according to the trust’s statement reported on Friday.

The trust said it believed the employees had accessed, or attempted to access, medical information without a legitimate reason. ITV reported that statement on 16 October, while LBC separately reported the investigation. The distinction between access and attempted access remains important: the available information does not establish that both employees opened records, or that misconduct has been proved.

The investigation follows the death of a man at Yorkshire Wildlife Park near Doncaster on 10 October. The Vector previously reported the park’s planned reopening after the fatal incident. Friday’s development concerns the handling of confidential health information, rather than a new finding about the circumstances of the death. Those are separate questions, and the records investigation should not be treated as evidence about how the incident happened.

The public information reviewed for this report does not establish which parts of the medical record may have been viewed, whether information was copied or shared, or what explanation the employees have given. It also does not establish a final disciplinary outcome. Describing the case as an investigation preserves the distinction between the trust’s concern and any conclusion reached after examining the evidence.

The wider background is NHS England’s guidance on preventing unlawful access to patient records, published on 8 July. It says employers must consider reporting access without a lawful reason to the Information Commissioner’s Office and the police. That instruction describes the response organisations should consider when unlawful access is identified; it does not establish that either body has become involved in this particular case.

NHS England’s July guidance also addresses how organisations can prevent and monitor inappropriate access. It links protection of confidential information to public confidence in the health service and in the development of shared digital records. The practical issue extends beyond whether an employee can open a file: organisations need to establish whether there was a legitimate reason for doing so.

A further NHS England announcement in September said staff suspected of improperly accessing records should be suspended immediately and have their access to computer systems revoked while the facts are established. The announcement described routine monitoring and audits as ways to identify suspicious activity, using records of who accessed information and when. Those national expectations provide context, but do not confirm what employment measures Yorkshire Ambulance Service has taken.

For now, the verified development is the disclosure that suspected access involving two employees is under investigation. There is insufficient public evidence to describe the case as a confirmed breach by both staff members, or to say that information was circulated beyond the records system. Any subsequent account should distinguish the findings about each employee from the initial suspicion.

Respond to this article

← Back to the edition