Recurring concern
Unreliable highway inspection and asset-recording processes
Pin
Get email alerts
Request correctionFirst reported 17 Jul 2014•Latest report 1 Dec 2025
What this concern includes
Includes failures in the dedicated highway inspection process and its supporting asset records, including incomplete highway-asset databases, inconsistent inspection coverage or methods, unclear inspection responsibilities and inadequate controls needed to ensure inspections identify and assess road-user hazards consistently.
Not included
- Excludes highway repairs, defect-response, public-complaint and remedial-action failures where the inspection or asset-recording process is not itself deficient.
- Excludes generic database, information-management, training or staffing deficiencies not explicitly tied to highway inspection or highway-asset records.
- Excludes landowner tree management and professional review where the concern is management of privately owned trees rather than the highway authority's inspection and asset-recording process.
- Excludes specific road hazards, signage, markings, lighting or road-layout deficiencies when no failure of the highway inspection or asset-recording process is identified.
- Reports
- 13
- Individual concerns
- 24
- Date range
- 2014–2025
- Stated actions
- 24
Distinct published reports
A report can raise multiple concerns
First to latest report issue date
Described in published responses
Reports over time
Reports over time
Reports about this concern issued each year.
* 2026 is projected from reports observed to 7 Sep 2026.
Most frequent recipients
Most frequent recipients
Reports about this concern sent to each recipient.
Concerns and responses across reports
Only concerns grouped under this recurring concern are included. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.
-
Concerns raised1
Insufficient proactive inspection for unreported faulty streetlights
This report raised 2 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
-
Action
Install remote monitoring across most highway streetlighting assets, including all grid-road and high-priority lighting, to identify outages proactively.
Stated by Milton Keynes City Council – Highways & Transportation Directorate
-
Concerns raised2
Insufficiently rigorous road inspections
Failure to audit the quality of road inspections
This report raised 5 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
-
Action
Maintain enhanced maintenance checks on Puddock Road to identify and address highway degradation, including rutting.
Stated by Cambridgeshire County Council
-
Concerns raised2
Lack of clear guidance for inspectors identifying vegetation encroachment on footpaths
Insufficient frequency of pavement inspections
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
-
Action
Remind inspectors to assess pavement narrowing or obstruction risks to vulnerable users and request maintenance or urgent responses where necessary.
Stated by Surrey County Council
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.2
-
Position
Current inspection processes and public-reporting mechanisms sufficiently address pavement debris and vegetation risks without changing the inspection guidance.
Stated by Surrey County Council
-
Position
The footway's annual Category 4 inspection is considered appropriate because its hierarchy is correctly assessed and public reports are handled throughout the year.
Stated by Surrey County Council
-
Concerns raised2
Failure of inspections to reasonably identify hazardous defects on geologically unstable road surfacing
Failure of highway operatives to identify defects hazardous to cyclists
This report raised 1 other concern. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.4
-
Action
Deliver and disseminate an incident debrief covering lessons learned, operational instructions, defect reporting, surface cracking and hazards to all road users.
Stated by Lancashire County Council -
Action
Deliver annual workshops for staff inspecting and assessing highway defects, covering policy compliance, national guidance and operational learning.
Stated by Lancashire County Council -
Action
Conduct a commissioned peer review of the Highway Safety Inspection Policy, prioritising learning from this case.
Stated by Lancashire County Council
-
Action
Deliver approved toolbox-talk awareness training to all Highway Operatives, including defect impacts and procedures for reporting defects for assessment.
Stated by Lancashire County Council
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
-
Position
Highway Operatives are not responsible for identifying defects; Highway Safety Inspectors and Technicians carry out the inspection regime.
Stated by Lancashire County Council
-
Concerns raised1
Failure to identify and remedy blocked drainage gullies
This report raised 1 other concern. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
-
Position
No further action is considered necessary beyond monitoring the highway under the Council’s existing inspection system.
Stated by North Lincolnshire Council
-
Concerns raised1
Failure to ensure defect inspectors receive recent road-condition complaints
This report raised 5 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
-
Action
Build a new data system and assess whether historical complaint data should be made available to highway inspectors.
Stated by Surrey County Council
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
-
Position
Limited resources and inconsistent public reporting mean inspections cannot be redirected or biased solely by the number of complaints received.
Stated by Surrey County Council
-
Concerns raised1
Failure to appropriately categorise pothole risks
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.2
-
Action
Introduce an enhanced risk-based inspection process allowing defect categories and response times to reflect location, usage and assessed risk.
Stated by East Sussex County Council -
Action
Continue reviewing the effectiveness of the enhanced risk-based approach, including how it would have affected the incident.
Stated by East Sussex County Council
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
-
Position
The enhanced risk-based inspection process makes a specific review of pothole categories unnecessary.
Stated by East Sussex County Council
-
Concerns raised1
Failure to include river fords and depth gauges in mandatory highways inspection requirements
This report raised 3 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.2
-
Position
The Government has no power to override local highway maintenance decisions or intervene in local inspection arrangements.
Stated by Department for Transport
-
Position
No Departmental action is considered necessary because the relevant decisions rest with local authorities and tools are already available.
Stated by Department for Transport
-
Concerns raised1
Failure of road inspections to identify drain problems
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.3
-
Action
Complete a review of inspection requirements and processes across the Strategic Road Network, including the speed of driven inspections.
Stated by National Highways -
Action
Issue a memorandum to all Areas highlighting recessed-gully locations, defect-recording methods, possible renewal of non-standard gullies, and communication of defects to Local Authorities.
Stated by National Highways -
Action
Move Area 8 from Asset Support Contract arrangements to the Asset Delivery approach, with inspections undertaken in-house by Highways England staff.
Stated by National Highways
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
-
Position
Existing risk-based inspection requirements and processes are considered consistent and sufficient, so no changes are proposed beyond the Asset Delivery transition.
Stated by National Highways
-
Concerns raised1
Failure to document carriageway defect condition during inspections
This report raised 6 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.2
-
Action
Maintain highway inspection procedures and systems in accordance with best-practice guidance.
Stated by Bury Borough Council -
Action
Take routine photographs of dangerous defects before repair and of repairs afterward.
Stated by Bury Borough Council
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
-
Position
The lack of pothole images or measurements did not restrict effective supervision or compliance with the statutory highway safety duty.
Stated by Bury Borough Council
Data last updated 7 September 2026