First reported 17 Mar 2015•Latest report 17 Feb 2025
Definition
What this concern includes
Includes bridge-specific hazards and dedicated controls intended to prevent, detect or mitigate fatal or serious falls, including parapets and barriers, anti-climb measures, CCTV or other monitoring, lighting, access restrictions, protection of landing areas, warnings and implementation of recommended safety works.
Not included
Excludes ordinary bridge maintenance, structural or aesthetic deficiencies where no material fall hazard or dedicated fall-prevention control is identified.
Excludes general suicide-prevention or fall hazards in non-bridge settings, including car parks, railway stations and buildings.
Excludes downstream rescue, medical treatment or investigation failures after a bridge fall where the bridge-fall prevention and detection controls were adequate.
Excludes generic road, pedestrian or water-safety concerns that do not involve a bridge-specific risk of falling.
Reports
12
Distinct published reports
Individual concerns
22
A report can raise multiple concerns
Date range
2015–2025
First to latest report issue date
Stated actions
34
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.
Durham County Council2
National Highways2
Calderdale Borough Council1
Cornwall Council1
Devon County Council1
Hampshire County Council1
Hertfordshire County Council1
Humber Bridge Board1
Kirklees Borough Council1
NHS England1
NHS Hertfordshire and West Essex Integrated Care Board1
Salford City Council1
Suffolk County Council1
Suspension Bridge Trustees1
Sussex Police1
English county council5
English metropolitan district council3
English unitary authority3
National road infrastructure body2
Executive non-departmental public body1
Integrated care board1
Police force1
Public transport authority1
Transport infrastructure authority1
Type not available1
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.
Hertfordshire
Concerns raised1
Failure of bridge safety measures to meet current guidance for preventing pedestrian jumping or falling
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.
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
Liaise with Network Rail and undertake Principal Inspections of both bridges to assess their structural condition.
Stated by Hertfordshire County CouncilStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 17 April 2025.
Action
Use the inspection findings to assess the feasibility and costs of raising or replacing the parapets and consider the appropriate improvement options.
Stated by Hertfordshire County CouncilStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 17 April 2025.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.3
Position
Parapet heights cannot safely be raised until inaccessible structural areas are assessed using up-to-date condition information.
Stated by Hertfordshire County CouncilUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.
Position
Closing the footbridge is not considered a safer response because diversion could increase unsafe pedestrian crossings and exacerbate isolation.
Stated by Hertfordshire County CouncilDisputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.
Position
Bridge inspections require Network Rail permission, railway closure and overhead power isolation before feasibility of parapet improvements can be assessed.
Stated by Hertfordshire County CouncilUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.
Manchester West
Concerns raised3
Failure to prevent continued use of an unsafe foot bridge as an alternative route
Failure to provide bridge barriers preventing pedestrians from easily climbing over and falling from the bridge
Failure to apply a clear basis for including foot bridges in barrier safety works
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
Complete a study of suicide-related issues at bridges and structures along the M602 route.
Stated by National HighwaysStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 18 September 2024.
Action
Increase parapet fence heights to 1.8 metres at six bridges with the highest numbers of suicide-related incidents.
Stated by National HighwaysStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 18 September 2024.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.3
Position
Available funding and achievable benefits constrain parapet upgrades, so locations with the highest number of incidents are prioritised.
Stated by National HighwaysUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.
Position
No parapet-height increase is currently proposed because the footbridge recorded three incidents, none causing injury or fatality, during the assessment period.
Stated by National HighwaysNo action considered necessaryThe respondent said that no further action was needed.
Position
National Highways is responsible for considering remedial works because the bridge structure, parapets and retaining walls are its assets.
Stated by Salford City CouncilRedirects responsibilityThe respondent said that another organisation was responsible for deciding or taking action.
County Durham and Darlington
Concerns raised4
Risk of death to persons falling from the bridge
Risk of death to persons near the foot of the bridge when persons fall
Accessible bridge parapet and railing
Absence of monitored CCTV, lighting or other means of detecting persons at immediate risk
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.1
Position
No further response is considered necessary at this stage after reviewing the existing submission and Regulation 28 report.
Stated by Durham County CouncilNo action considered necessaryThe respondent said that no further action was needed.
Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton
Concerns raised3
Lack of monitored CCTV coverage of the bridge and approach area
Insufficient measures to prevent deaths from jumping from bridges
Lack of physical measures preventing access over or around bridge railings and jumping to the carriageway
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.3
Action
Add the location to the South East Network Needs list for future funding prioritisation.
Stated by National HighwaysStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 20 October 2022.
Action
Apply for future funding for a study into preventing future suicide events at the location.
Stated by National HighwaysStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 20 October 2022.
Action
Engage specialist teams and agencies to assess whether interventions are warranted when similar risks are identified on County Council highway bridges.
Stated by Hampshire County CouncilStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 20 October 2022.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.3
Position
National Highways, as bridge asset owner, must essentially consider the required action, while the County Council can collaborate on potential solutions.
Stated by Hampshire County CouncilRedirects responsibilityThe respondent said that another organisation was responsible for deciding or taking action.
Position
Further measures, including CCTV or physical barriers, depend on a funded study establishing their suitability and securing future funding.
Stated by National HighwaysUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.
Position
The existing 1.65-metre parapet complies with current standards, and enclosing the walkway is not considered appropriate because enclosed spaces can increase antisocial behaviour.
Stated by National HighwaysExisting arrangements considered sufficientThe respondent said that existing arrangements were sufficient, so no further action was needed.
County Durham and Darlington
Concerns raised3
Failure to prevent pedestrian access to the area where people falling from the bridge may land
Absence of monitored CCTV, lighting or other means of detecting people at immediate risk
Failure to prevent pedestrians climbing over the bridge parapet
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.5
Action
Consider implementing lighting and CCTV at the viaduct through feasibility and planning processes.
Stated by Durham County CouncilStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 9 September 2021.
Action
Assess whether lighting and CCTV can be implemented at an earlier stage as part of the viaduct prevention work.
Stated by Durham County CouncilStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 9 September 2021.
Action
Complete high-risk-location review, feasibility study and options appraisal to identify a preferred suicide-prevention measure for Newton Cap Viaduct.
Stated by Durham County CouncilStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 9 September 2021.
Action
Undertake detailed design and approval assessments for a potential additional parapet fence, including structural, traffic, heritage and planning considerations.
Stated by Durham County CouncilStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 9 September 2021.
Action
Source an external consultant specialising in designing out suicide to progress viaduct prevention measures.
Stated by Durham County CouncilStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 9 September 2021.
West Yorkshire Eastern
Concerns raised1
Risk of people falling from a bridge at a known suicide spot
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.
Avon
Concerns raised1
Hazard of student deaths from the bridge
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.14
Action
Train bridge attendants in Safe Intervention Training.
Stated by Clifton Suspension Bridge TrustStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 14 September 2020.
Action
Increase night-time bridge attendant staffing from two to three.
Stated by Clifton Suspension Bridge TrustStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 14 September 2020.
Action
Upgrade CCTV coverage with high-definition, low-light and thermal-imaging capability.
Stated by Clifton Suspension Bridge TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 14 September 2020.
Action
Link CCTV cameras to alarms alerting attendants to pedestrians between midnight and 5 a.m.
Stated by Clifton Suspension Bridge TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 14 September 2020.
Action
Illuminate Samaritan signs throughout the night.
Stated by Clifton Suspension Bridge TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 14 September 2020.
Action
Rebuild the Clifton-side quiet room for people in distress awaiting emergency services.
Stated by Clifton Suspension Bridge TrustStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 14 September 2020.
Action
Maintain anti-climb barriers on the bridge span with anti-climb mesh.
Stated by Clifton Suspension Bridge TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 14 September 2020.
Action
Maintain continuous overnight lighting on the bridge, footways and buttresses.
Stated by Clifton Suspension Bridge TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 14 September 2020.
Action
Install mesh panels on parapet-fence ends to prevent access onto the span.
Stated by Clifton Suspension Bridge TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 14 September 2020.
Action
Install a half-corona barrier on the Clifton South abutment to prevent access along the ledge.
Stated by Clifton Suspension Bridge TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 14 September 2020.
Action
Install covers on end parapet posts to restrict foothold access onto buttress walls.
Stated by Clifton Suspension Bridge TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 14 September 2020.
Action
Advance plans and seek stakeholder support for further suicide-prevention improvements.
Stated by Clifton Suspension Bridge TrustStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 14 September 2020.
Action
Extend parapet anti-climb fencing over the span, subject to structural and planning approvals.
Stated by Clifton Suspension Bridge TrustStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 14 September 2020.
Action
Build walkways beneath the buttresses, subject to structural and planning approvals.
Stated by Clifton Suspension Bridge TrustStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 14 September 2020.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.2
Position
Further physical suicide-prevention measures are constrained by structural feasibility, including wind-loading requirements.
Stated by Clifton Suspension Bridge TrustUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.
Position
Further bridge changes require approval from Historic England, planning authorities and conservation officers.
Stated by Clifton Suspension Bridge TrustRedirects responsibilityThe respondent said that another organisation was responsible for deciding or taking action.
West Yorkshire (Western)
Concerns raised1
Risk of further fatal falls from North Bridge
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.5
Action
Complete the feasibility study identifying suicide-prevention options for North Bridge.
Stated by Calderdale Borough CouncilStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 8 July 2018.
Action
Progress the preferred anti-climb mesh and steeple-coping works for North Bridge, including drawings, approvals, procurement and site construction.
Stated by Calderdale Borough CouncilStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 8 July 2018.
Action
Make approximately £200,000 available to fund the preferred bridge safety works.
Stated by Calderdale Borough CouncilStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 8 July 2018.
Action
Complete the review of CCTV coverage identifying a blind spot on the bridge.
Stated by Calderdale Borough CouncilStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 8 July 2018.
Action
Continue checking the feasibility of installing an additional CCTV camera to address the bridge blind spot.
Stated by Calderdale Borough CouncilStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 8 July 2018.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
Position
The 3.35-metre parapet option was disregarded because the existing parapets’ strength could not be determined and might fail under loading.
Stated by Calderdale Borough CouncilUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.
East Riding and Hull
Concerns raised1
Failure of CCTV image quality to support accurate monitoring of bridge activity
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.
Plymouth, Torbay and South Devon
Concerns raised1
Failure to prevent people from easily crossing the walkway barrier
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.
Pin
Get email alerts
Request correction
Includes bridge-specific hazards and dedicated controls intended to prevent, detect or mitigate fatal or serious falls, including parapets and barriers, anti-climb measures, CCTV or other monitoring, lighting, access restrictions, protection of landing areas, warnings and implementation of recommended safety works.
