Recipient

Ashford Borough Council

Pin Request correction

First report 14 Sep 2020•Latest report 14 Sep 2020

Recipient record

Reports, concerns and published responses

Local government · English district council. This page brings together reports naming this recipient and response statements clearly connected to concerns raised in those reports.

Reports
1

Naming this recipient

Published responses
0%

Found for named reports

Concerns addressed
0

Across all linked responses

Stated actions
0

Described in responses

Reports over time

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.

0%published responses found
0stated actions described

Topic comparisons are not available in the current evidence snapshot.

Concerns and recipient responses

Statements from Ashford Borough Council linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. Central and South East Kent

    AI-generated summary

    YUGAL LIMBU · 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

    Yugal Limbu became separated from his family after drinking with friends and family, was last seen walking towards home while intoxicated, and was later found deceased in the River Stour. The inquest concluded that he accidentally fell into the river and suffered submersion. Concerns were raised about a hazardous gap and sloped surface near the footbridge at Victoria Way, including uncertainty over which local authority was responsible for the area.

    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 Ashford Borough Council; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Hazardous gap and sloped surface where the path meets the river

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) Victoria Park is well used by the public including at night and Kent Police raised a concern at the inquest hearing that there is an area by the footbridge where the path meets the river at Victoria Way, Ashford that is a hazard to the public. There is a clear gap and a sloped surface, and evidence from Kent Police is that this is dangerous for those using the path in diminished daylight or at night. (2) This matter has been drawn to the attention of Ashford Borough Council and Kent County Council following the inquest hearing and it is unclear which authority has responsibility for the area. ”
    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 Ashford Borough Council; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of clarity about authority responsibility for the area

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) Victoria Park is well used by the public including at night and Kent Police raised a concern at the inquest hearing that there is an area by the footbridge where the path meets the river at Victoria Way, Ashford that is a hazard to the public. There is a clear gap and a sloped surface, and evidence from Kent Police is that this is dangerous for those using the path in diminished daylight or at night. (2) This matter has been drawn to the attention of Ashford Borough Council and Kent County Council following the inquest hearing and it is unclear which authority has responsibility for the area. ”
    Open source report
Back to top

Published response patterns

Compared with other recipients in reports included in PFD Monitor

Describes published response evidence, not performance.

Published responses found

0%
0%All other recipients 58%
0%100%

How actions were described at the time

This respondent
All other recipients
47%25%27%<1%<1%
  • Completed
  • In progress
  • Planned
  • Unclear
  • Partially completed

Statuses reflect what recipients said at the time. PFD Monitor does not verify whether actions happened.

Types of action described in responses

Percentages use all actions described by each group. An action may have more than one type, so percentages do not total 100%.

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