Recurring concern
Inadequate road warning signage
Pin
Get email alerts
Request correctionFirst reported 2 Dec 2013•Latest report 1 Jun 2026
What this concern includes
Includes deficiencies in warning, hazard, navigation or speed-limit signage specifically intended to protect road users on roads, bends, bridges, junctions, roundabouts or comparable road approaches, including failures of prominence, placement, direction or provision.
Not included
- Excludes non-road warnings, including railway, product, food-allergen, clinical and social-care policy communications.
- Excludes road markings, street lighting, vegetation maintenance, speed-limit setting and physical road layout unless the assertion specifically concerns dedicated road warning signage.
- Excludes general road safety deficiencies or collision hazards that do not identify inadequate warning signage.
- Reports
- 84
- Individual concerns
- 100
- Date range
- 2013–2026
- Stated actions
- 118
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
Lack of warning signs for pedestrians and motorists approaching the crossing
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
No linked response statementsNo respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
-
Concerns raised1
Failure to exhibit appropriate road signage
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.1
-
Action
Attend the collision site with police and assess the highway layout, signs, road markings, and condition.
Stated by Island Roads Services Limited
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.3
-
Position
The Isle of Wight Council, as local highway authority, retains authority to implement reduced speed limits and install new road signs.
Stated by Island Roads Services Limited
-
Position
Existing signs and measures were considered adequate because speeds were below 60 mph and the collision record did not indicate frequent speed-related collisions.
Stated by Island Roads Services Limited -
Position
Additional signs or a reduced speed limit were considered unlikely to measurably affect collision rates, so limited resources should not be allocated to them.
Stated by Island Roads Services Limited
-
Concerns raised2
Lack of signage prohibiting eastbound U turns or right turns at the central-reservation gap
Lack of no-entry signage for eastbound vehicles at the central-reservation gap
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
Investigate amendments to signing and road markings at appropriate locations to provide improved advance information.
Stated by National Highways
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.2
-
Position
Turning manoeuvres cannot be prohibited without suitable alternative U-turn facilities, which are absent between Bowes Interchange and Cross Lanes junction.
Stated by National Highways
-
Position
No legally approved or appropriate sign can indicate the gap restriction because it could mislead westbound drivers and create danger.
Stated by National Highways
-
Concerns raised1
Unclear and potentially confusing signage in the immediate area
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 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
There is sufficient room to segregate cyclists, vehicles and pedestrians effectively on this section of Moss Lane.
Stated by Trafford Borough Council
-
Concerns raised1
Inadequate signage giving pedestrians guidance on safe crossing points
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.2
-
Action
Erect an additional sign identifying the pedestrian route and destination at the top of the steps.
Stated by Gateshead Borough Council -
Action
Investigate whether pedestrian routes are appropriately signed on both sides of the bridgehead.
Stated by Gateshead Borough Council
-
Concerns raised1
Lack of signage indicating the junction
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.2
-
Action
Place give-way road markings on Bonehams Lane.
Stated by Leicestershire County Council -
Action
Place “Slow” road markings on Ullesthorpe Road to encourage drivers to reduce speed near the junction.
Stated by Leicestershire County Council
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
-
Position
Additional junction signage was considered unnecessary because existing visual cues should alert reasonably careful road users to the junction.
Stated by Leicestershire County Council
-
Concerns raised1
Lack of prominent signage communicating the 20 mph speed limit on London Bridge
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.1
-
Action
Install an additional pair of 20 mph repeater signs on the north side of London Bridge.
Stated by Transport for London
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
-
Position
Existing repeater-sign arrangements comply with national standards and were considered sufficient to remind drivers that the speed limit remained 20mph.
Stated by Transport for London
-
Concerns raised1
Failure to provide appropriately located and informative warning signage for road subsidence
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.2
-
Action
Erect and retain temporary uneven-road signage, with regular inspection and review.
Stated by Lincolnshire County Council -
Action
Provide and sign an advisory 40 mph speed limit on Fodderdyke Bank.
Stated by Lincolnshire County Council
-
Concerns raised1
Lack of clear indication of the entrance into St Mary's Farm and Benges Cottages
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.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
-
Position
Additional lighting is not considered necessary because the route is rural, lighting would be disproportionate, and it could distract drivers.
Stated by West Sussex County Council
-
Concerns raised1
Lack of signage warning motorists of a concealed entrance
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
No linked response statementsNo respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
Data last updated 7 September 2026