First reported 21 Nov 2013•Latest report 6 Mar 2026
Definition
What this concern includes
Includes barrier height, climbability, coverage, replacement and measurement failures where guarding is intended to prevent access to a dangerous drop or area.
Not included
Clinical bed or chair fall-prevention controls
Vehicle collision barriers
Security controls with no physical-injury hazard
Reports
46
Distinct published reports
Individual concerns
57
A report can raise multiple concerns
Date range
2013–2026
First to latest report issue date
Stated actions
90
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.
Network Rail14
Cornwall Council3
Durham County Council3
National Highways3
Canal & River Trust2
Hammerson PLC2
Isle of Wight Council2
Recipient name withheld2
The National Trust For Places Of Historic Interest Or Natural Beauty2
Alexandra Park and Palace Charitable Trust1
Arriva Rail North Limited1
Bedford Borough Council1
British Transport Police1
Calderdale Borough Council1
Chesterfield Borough Council1
Rail infrastructure manager14
English unitary authority11
English county council5
Private limited company5
English metropolitan district council4
Venue4
Type not available4
Ministerial department3
National road infrastructure body3
Registered charity3
Train operating company3
English district council2
Inland waterway body2
London borough council2
Public limited company2
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.
Isle of Wight
Concerns raised1
Lack of fencing to protect the public from falling over the cliff edge at Tennyson Down
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 concerns
Each 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
Conduct site visits at Culver and Tennyson Downs with the Isle of Wight Suicide Prevention and Intervention team.
Stated by National Trust – Isle of WightStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 8 February 2020.
Action
Conduct a full internal review of suicide-prevention measures after completing the planned stakeholder meetings.
Stated by National Trust – Isle of WightStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 8 February 2020.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
Position
Fencing the several miles of coastline is not economically viable or aesthetically appropriate.
Stated by National Trust – Isle of WightUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.
Nottinghamshire
Concerns raised3
Failure to prevent access to the mezzanine openings
Accessible 18-foot drop between the mezzanine and basement shop floor
Lack of fall protection below the mezzanine openings
This report raised 4 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concerns
Each 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
Replace the broken gate lock.
Stated by Urbn UK LimitedStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 6 September 2019.
Action
Restrict access beyond the gate to authorised staff and extend the instruction to new staff.
Stated by Urbn UK LimitedStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 6 September 2019.
Action
Replace the scaffolding with high railings throughout.
Stated by Urbn UK LimitedStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 6 September 2019.
Action
Infilling the voids with steel plates.
Stated by Urbn UK LimitedStatus unclearThe respondent did not make the status of this action clear when they made their response on 6 September 2019.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
Position
The incident was almost certainly caused by deliberate risk-taking, and no member of the public had previously attempted to access the area.
Stated by Urbn UK LimitedDisputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.
North Wales (East and Central)
Concerns raised1
Excessive spacing between aqueduct parapet uprights
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 concerns
Each 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
Investigate physical options for reducing gaps between the aqueduct uprights with relevant partners and regulatory bodies.
Stated by Canal & River TrustStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 9 June 2019.
Action
Conduct an informal public consultation on suitable options for reducing the gaps between the uprights.
Stated by Canal & River TrustStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 9 June 2019.
Action
Develop and submit a final design for reducing the gaps between the uprights for statutory approval after consultation.
Stated by Canal & River TrustStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 9 June 2019.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
Position
Existing signage, volunteer ranger and information controls adequately address risks associated with normal aqueduct use.
Stated by Canal & River TrustExisting arrangements considered sufficientThe respondent said that existing arrangements were sufficient, so no further action was needed.
Cumbria
Concerns raised1
Failure to prevent access to the railway line through adequately secure fencing
Responses linked to these concerns
Each 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
Install additional meshing and netting at the location to deter climbing.
Stated by Network RailStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 11 June 2019.
Action
Review trespass risk around the area and identify the bridge wing wall and track-level safety rail for further mitigation.
Stated by Network RailStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 11 June 2019.
Action
Investigate whether attaching mesh to the bridge’s tubular handrail or safety rail would improve security.
Stated by Network RailStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 11 June 2019.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.3
Position
The line speed at this location is 110mph, not 125mph, although trains still travel at high speed.
Stated by Network RailDisputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.
Position
Current boundary measures meet the reasonably practicable obligation, and no further assessment is triggered because there is no prior evidence of trespass.
Stated by Network RailExisting arrangements considered sufficientThe respondent said that existing arrangements were sufficient, so no further action was needed.
Position
Replacing all fencing with palisade is not reasonably practicable given the scale of the railway network and local risk assessment requirements.
Stated by Network RailUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.
West Yorkshire (Western)
Concerns raised1
Delay in implementing anti-climbing mesh at the location
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 concerns
Each 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
Finalize drawings for the preferred anti-climb mesh and steeple coping option.
Stated by Calderdale Borough CouncilStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 24 February 2019.
Action
Obtain Cabinet approval for planning and listed-building applications and make funding available for the preferred option.
Stated by Calderdale Borough CouncilStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 24 February 2019.
Action
Submit and progress planning and listed-building consent applications for the anti-climb mesh and steeple coping works.
Stated by Calderdale Borough CouncilStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 24 February 2019.
Action
Prepare the contract and tender process for the North Bridge anti-climb works.
Stated by Calderdale Borough CouncilStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 24 February 2019.
Hertfordshire
Concerns raised1
Inadequacy of fencing
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 concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
No linked response statements
No respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
North East Kent
Concerns raised1
Failure to prevent public access to live rails at ground level
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 concerns
Each 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
Continue developing reasonably practicable safety solutions for the ground-level conductor rail system.
Stated by Network RailStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 23 September 2018.
Action
Install platform-end gates and anti-trespass measures at more than 50 South East route stations, with works already completed at 30 locations.
Stated by Network RailStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 23 September 2018.
Action
Improve fencing at higher-risk locations through a programme including £800,000 of work due for completion by April 2019.
Stated by Network RailStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 23 September 2018.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
Position
Converting or replacing the ground-level conductor rail is not reasonably practicable because of the railway system’s complexity and cost.
Stated by Network RailUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.
Bedfordshire and Luton
Concerns raised1
Inadequate trespass deterrence and fencing around the foot crossing
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 concerns
Each 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
Anti-trespass matting is not considered appropriate because there is no evidence of shortcuts or trespass at the crossing.
Stated by Network RailNo action considered necessaryThe respondent said that no further action was needed.
Position
Further boundary mitigation is not required because fencing is in good condition, fit for purpose, compliant, and unrelated to the incident’s access route.
Stated by Network RailExisting arrangements considered sufficientThe respondent said that existing arrangements were sufficient, so no further action was needed.
Cornwall and Isles of Scilly
Concerns raised2
Lack of maintenance of temporary rope barriers at cliff hot spot sites
Lack of permanent barriers at cliff hot spot sites
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 concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
No linked response statements
No respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
Hertfordshire
Concerns raised1
Inadequate fencing beside the railway track
Responses linked to these concerns
Each 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
Implement a mandatory fencing standard requiring risk-assessed boundary management measures for Network Rail-controlled infrastructure.
Stated by Network RailStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 5 February 2018.
Action
Complete enhancement work at identified Watford-area access locations, including installing additional palisade fencing around St Albans Road and Bedford Street.
Stated by Network RailStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 5 February 2018.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
Position
The boundary fencing was compliant and inspections identified no faults requiring repair in the St Albans Road and Bedford Street area.
Stated by Network RailDisputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.
Pin
Get email alerts
Request correction
Includes barrier height, climbability, coverage, replacement and measurement failures where guarding is intended to prevent access to a dangerous drop or area.
