Recurring concern
Inadequate physical barriers preventing access to dangerous drops or areas
- Reports that mention this concern
- 46
- Times this concern has been raised
- 57
- Stated actions linked to this concern
- 90
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.
What is not included
- Clinical bed or chair fall-prevention controls
- Vehicle collision barriers
- Security controls with no physical-injury hazard
Trends
Reports over time
Reports mentioning this concern, 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.
Reports and published responses 46 reports
See individual reports that have raised this concern, and the actions taken in response
-
Concerns raised1
Failure to maintain fencing and walls separating the public footpath from the railway line
Linked response
- Network Rail
Stated actions An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.5
-
Network Rail
Review active fencing upgrade proposals for both sides of the incident section.
-
Network Rail
Deliver planned fencing and boundary repairs in the incident section, restoring smaller stone-wall sections and replacing failed larger sections with lineside fencing.
-
Network Rail
Complete an extensive lineside fencing upgrade north of the location between Spittal and Berwick.
-
Network Rail
Conduct a site walk-through between Scremerston and Spittal to assess boundary robustness.
-
Network Rail
Plan further works to improve boundary robustness between Scremerston and Spittal.
-
Concerns raised1
Lack of a physical barrier at the end of platform three
This report raised 1 other concern. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Linked response
- Arriva Rail North Limited
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
-
Arriva Rail North Limited
Responsibility for barriers and fencing preventing track access lies with Network Rail as part of the station infrastructure.
-
Concerns raised1
Lack of natural barriers at the edge of the cliff at Hells Mouth
This report raised 1 other concern. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Linked response
- The National Trust For Places Of Historic Interest Or Natural Beauty
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
-
The National Trust For Places Of Historic Interest Or Natural Beauty
Vegetation cannot feasibly prevent cliff-edge access and could encourage visitors into more dangerous positions, increasing accidental trip and fall risks.
-
Concerns raised1
Failure to prevent people from easily crossing the walkway barrier
No linked response statementsNo respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
-
Concerns raised1
Inadequate physical barriers at the railway access gate
No linked response statementsNo respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
-
Concerns raised1
Failure to provide a barrier that prevents or deters climbing onto the bridge wall
This report raised 1 other concern. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Linked response
- National Highways
Stated actions An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
-
National Highways
Commission and complete a stakeholder-informed review of preventative measures for Orwell Bridge.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.2
-
National Highways
Additional solid parapets or panels will not be installed because their weight and wind effects could significantly compromise bridge stability.
-
National Highways
Toe holds will not be installed because they could encourage climbing, create workforce safety risks, and have unproven effectiveness.
-
Concerns raised1
Lack of rails or other effective barriers segregating drinkers from the canal
This report raised 2 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Linked response
- Canal & River Trust
Stated actions An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
-
Canal & River Trust
Complete a site safety review and risk assessment covering segregation, rescue equipment, self-rescue, lighting and signage at Victoria Quays.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
-
Canal & River Trust
Existing barriers adequately exclude people from the waterway edge, and the basin’s lighting is considered sufficient for its intended operational use.
-
Concerns raised1
Inadequate restriction of public access to the railway track from the steps accessing footbridge 57
Linked response
- Network Rail Infrastructure Limited
Stated actions An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.2
-
Network Rail Infrastructure Limited
Install shorter palisade pales on the lower flight to connect with the boundary fence and raise the parapet to at least two metres.
-
Network Rail Infrastructure Limited
Raise the upper-flight stepped parapet with engineering brick and bullnose units to prevent scaling and access behind the lower-flight palisade.
-
Concerns raised1
Failure to physically modify an easily accessible wall to prevent dangerous use as a seating area
This report raised 1 other concern. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Linked response
- Hammerson PLC
Stated actions An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.4
-
Hammerson PLC
Install hostile planting to make access to the Level 3 corner parapet walls more difficult.
-
Hammerson PLC
Install hostile planting around lower parapet walls on Levels 3 and 3A where potential falls exceed five metres.
-
Hammerson PLC
Install vehicle stopping barriers beside relevant lower parapet walls to prevent vehicles being used as steps.
-
Hammerson PLC
Continue exploring the feasibility of raising parapet walls on Levels 3 and 3A, including required planning and building-regulations approvals.
-
Concerns raised1
Failure of after-hours station and track access barriers to prevent access
Linked response
- Network Rail Infrastructure Limited
Stated actions An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
-
Network Rail Infrastructure Limited
Install barriers to separate rail infrastructure where access is unnecessary, including fencing SouthEastern infrastructure from LOROL infrastructure at the station.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.2
-
Network Rail Infrastructure Limited
Station access and management are outside the infrastructure owner's management because the station is operated by the train operator.
-
Network Rail Infrastructure Limited
Responsibility for station access information and practices rests with the station operator, which provided the relevant clarification.
Actions and positions describe what organisations say in published responses. Implementation is not independently verified.
Data last updated 7 September 2026