Recipient

Alexandra Park and Palace Charitable Trust

First report 22 Jun 2022•Latest report 22 Jun 2022

Recipient record

Reports, concerns and published responses

Private and voluntary organisations · Registered charity. This page brings together reports naming this recipient and response statements clearly connected to concerns raised in those reports.

Reports: 1
Published responses: 100%
Concerns addressed: 3
Stated actions: 0

Reports over time

Reports naming this recipient by issue year.

Evidence profile

Report topics

Share of this recipient’s reports compared with all other recipients.

100%published responses found

0stated actions described

Topic comparisons are not available in the current evidence snapshot.

Concerns and recipient responses

Statements from Alexandra Park and Palace Charitable Trust linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

22 Jun2022
North London
Concerns raised4
1. Lack of lighting beside the stream and railway fence
2. Lack of signs identifying the stream, its depth and warnings of danger
3. Lack of signs assisting with locating a way out from the venue grounds
1. Inadequate fencing preventing ingress to the railway track
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Respondent positions 2
1. Position
  APPCT disputes that locating an exit from this open park area is challenging and therefore will not erect exit signs there.
  Disputes the concern
1. Position
  The stream lighting and railway-fence adequacy matters concern assets APPCT does not own or operate and therefore do not require action by APPCT.
  Outside remit
AI-generated summary

Connor Peter Marron · Prevention of Future Deaths report

This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

Report summary

Connor Peter Marron was struck and fatally injured by a train on 2 January 2022 near Hornsey Railway Station after leaving a public house to return to Alexander Palace. Concerns included inadequate lighting and signage near the stream and railway fence, and a fence that was not adequate to prevent access to the railway track.

Read the report on judiciary.uk
Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted
PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Alexandra Park and Palace Charitable Trust; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation
Lack of lighting beside the stream and railway fence
Wider context from the report
“1. There was no lighting beside the stream or the railway fence, nor any signs identifying the stream, its depth and any warning of danger. ”
Open source report
Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted
PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Alexandra Park and Palace Charitable Trust; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation
Lack of signs identifying the stream, its depth and warnings of danger
Wider context from the report
“1. There was no lighting beside the stream or the railway fence, nor any signs identifying the stream, its depth and any warning of danger. ”
Open source report
Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted
PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Alexandra Park and Palace Charitable Trust; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation
Lack of signs assisting with locating a way out from the venue grounds
Wider context from the report
“2. There were no signs in that area to assist with locating a way out from that part of the venue's grounds. ”
Open source report
Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted
PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Alexandra Park and Palace Charitable Trust; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation
Inadequate fencing preventing ingress to the railway track
Wider context from the report
“3. The fence separating the venue grounds from the railway track was not adequate to prevent ingress to the railway track. ”
Open source report
Source evidence

How this respondent position was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation
APPCT disputes that locating an exit from this open park area is challenging and therefore will not erect exit signs there.

Verbatim wording from the response
“With particular reference to Matter of Concern 2, we do not share your concern that it is challenging for a park user to locate an exit from this area of the park. This is an open area of the park and with multiple options through which to exit the park and choose a number of adjoining roads. We are also very conscious of the precedent that such a decision could create for all park operators across the UK.”

Source location
Response from Alexandra Palace
Page 2 · response
Published 22 September 2022
Open published response
Source evidence

How this respondent position was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation
The stream lighting and railway-fence adequacy matters concern assets APPCT does not own or operate and therefore do not require action by APPCT.

Verbatim wording from the response
“railway assets owned by Network Rail. To access the railway boundary fence, an individual must first leave the park onto public streets and cross the New River; two locations owned by third parties.”

Source location
Response from Alexandra Palace
Page 2 · response
Published 22 September 2022
Open published response

Information checked against published PFD reports and official responses · Data reviewed 7 Sep 2026 · About data quality and limitations

Data last updated 7 September 2026

Reports, concerns and published responses

Reports over time

Concerns raised4

Lack of lighting beside the stream and railway fence

Lack of signs identifying the stream, its depth and warnings of danger

Lack of signs assisting with locating a way out from the venue grounds

Inadequate fencing preventing ingress to the railway track

Respondent positions A position is what this recipient says about the concern when it does not describe a specific action.2

Respondent positions 2