Erewash Borough Council

Local government · English district council

Pin Request correction

First report 23 Jun 2021•Latest report 23 Jun 2021

Reports, concerns and published responses

Reports over time

Reports naming this recipient by issue year.

* 2026 is projected from reports observed to 7 Sep 2026.

Reports
1

Naming this recipient

Published responses
100%

Found for named reports

Concerns addressed
3

Across all linked responses

Stated actions
1

Described in responses

Concerns and recipient responses

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

  1. Nottinghamshire

    AI-generated summary

    Heather Frances Page · 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

    On 7 October 2020, Heather Frances Page stepped in front of a train and died in the resulting collision. The report identified concerns about pedestrian crossings requiring people to walk on the tracks, a high number of fatalities, ease of access to the track, and difficulties reducing or rationalising crossings because of local authority opposition.

    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 Erewash Borough Council; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Railway track with multiple easy access points near a popular beauty spot increasing suicide risk

    Wider context from the report

    “Evidence was heard regarding the section of track adjacent to the Attenborough Nature Reserve. I noted the following issues of concern in relation to this section of track:- (1) There are a number of pedestrian crossings along this short stretch of track which involve pedestrians having to walk on the tracks to cross to the other side. (2) There has been a high number of fatalities along this short section of track (seven in as many years). (3) The nature of that section of track is such that it increases the risks of completed suicide due to the ease of access at multiple points and its proximity to a very popular beauty spot. (4) Efforts by Network Rail to reduce / rationalise the number of crossings along that stretch have failed due, in part, to opposition from the relevant local authorities. (5) Support or opposition from local authorities and councils will respectively increase or reduce the prospects of the risks inherent in that stretch of track being reduced. In the absence of support from local authorities and councils, Network Rail will be less likely to make an application to close or rationalise crossings along this section of track, given the known opposition from some persons living near, or using, the crossings. If an application is made, it will be less likely to be granted in the absence of support from the relevant local authorities and councils. ”
    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 Erewash Borough Council; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Pedestrian crossings requiring people to walk on railway tracks

    Wider context from the report

    “Evidence was heard regarding the section of track adjacent to the Attenborough Nature Reserve. I noted the following issues of concern in relation to this section of track:- (1) There are a number of pedestrian crossings along this short stretch of track which involve pedestrians having to walk on the tracks to cross to the other side. (2) There has been a high number of fatalities along this short section of track (seven in as many years). (3) The nature of that section of track is such that it increases the risks of completed suicide due to the ease of access at multiple points and its proximity to a very popular beauty spot. (4) Efforts by Network Rail to reduce / rationalise the number of crossings along that stretch have failed due, in part, to opposition from the relevant local authorities. (5) Support or opposition from local authorities and councils will respectively increase or reduce the prospects of the risks inherent in that stretch of track being reduced. In the absence of support from local authorities and councils, Network Rail will be less likely to make an application to close or rationalise crossings along this section of track, given the known opposition from some persons living near, or using, the crossings. If an application is made, it will be less likely to be granted in the absence of support from the relevant local authorities and councils. ”
    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 Erewash Borough Council; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Dependence on local authority support for closing or rationalising crossings

    Wider context from the report

    “Evidence was heard regarding the section of track adjacent to the Attenborough Nature Reserve. I noted the following issues of concern in relation to this section of track:- (1) There are a number of pedestrian crossings along this short stretch of track which involve pedestrians having to walk on the tracks to cross to the other side. (2) There has been a high number of fatalities along this short section of track (seven in as many years). (3) The nature of that section of track is such that it increases the risks of completed suicide due to the ease of access at multiple points and its proximity to a very popular beauty spot. (4) Efforts by Network Rail to reduce / rationalise the number of crossings along that stretch have failed due, in part, to opposition from the relevant local authorities. (5) Support or opposition from local authorities and councils will respectively increase or reduce the prospects of the risks inherent in that stretch of track being reduced. In the absence of support from local authorities and councils, Network Rail will be less likely to make an application to close or rationalise crossings along this section of track, given the known opposition from some persons living near, or using, the crossings. If an application is made, it will be less likely to be granted in the absence of support from the relevant local authorities and councils. ”
    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 Erewash Borough Council; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to reduce or rationalise the number of crossings

    Wider context from the report

    “Evidence was heard regarding the section of track adjacent to the Attenborough Nature Reserve. I noted the following issues of concern in relation to this section of track:- (1) There are a number of pedestrian crossings along this short stretch of track which involve pedestrians having to walk on the tracks to cross to the other side. (2) There has been a high number of fatalities along this short section of track (seven in as many years). (3) The nature of that section of track is such that it increases the risks of completed suicide due to the ease of access at multiple points and its proximity to a very popular beauty spot. (4) Efforts by Network Rail to reduce / rationalise the number of crossings along that stretch have failed due, in part, to opposition from the relevant local authorities. (5) Support or opposition from local authorities and councils will respectively increase or reduce the prospects of the risks inherent in that stretch of track being reduced. In the absence of support from local authorities and councils, Network Rail will be less likely to make an application to close or rationalise crossings along this section of track, given the known opposition from some persons living near, or using, the crossings. If an application is made, it will be less likely to be granted in the absence of support from the relevant local authorities and councils. ”
    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 Erewash Borough Council; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    High fatality rate along the section of track

    Wider context from the report

    “Evidence was heard regarding the section of track adjacent to the Attenborough Nature Reserve. I noted the following issues of concern in relation to this section of track:- (1) There are a number of pedestrian crossings along this short stretch of track which involve pedestrians having to walk on the tracks to cross to the other side. (2) There has been a high number of fatalities along this short section of track (seven in as many years). (3) The nature of that section of track is such that it increases the risks of completed suicide due to the ease of access at multiple points and its proximity to a very popular beauty spot. (4) Efforts by Network Rail to reduce / rationalise the number of crossings along that stretch have failed due, in part, to opposition from the relevant local authorities. (5) Support or opposition from local authorities and councils will respectively increase or reduce the prospects of the risks inherent in that stretch of track being reduced. In the absence of support from local authorities and councils, Network Rail will be less likely to make an application to close or rationalise crossings along this section of track, given the known opposition from some persons living near, or using, the crossings. If an application is made, it will be less likely to be granted in the absence of support from the relevant local authorities and councils. ”
    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

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

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Submitted a consultation response supporting proposals to improve crossing safety and accessibility for disabled and non-disabled users.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “As part of the Level Crossing Closures Programme, the Council were invited to respond to Network Rail’s Equality Stakeholder Engagement Topic Guide (consultants ████████ had been appointed by Network Rail to undertake an Equalities Impact Assessment (EqIA) to investigate the impact of any works affecting the crossing). On behalf of the Council, I produced the response looking at the various issues from the perspective of Planning Policy. In the Council’s submission (Appendix B), support was demonstrated for any proposal, including a replacement footbridge, which would help to improve both the safety for crossing users as well as increased accessibility at the crossing for disabled and non-disabled users.”

    Source location

    2021-0213-Response-from-Erewash-Borough-Council_Published
    Page 1 · response
    Published 28 June 2021

    Open published response
Back to top

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