Recipient

Persimmon Homes Limited

Pin Request correction

First report 15 Feb 2019•Latest report 15 Feb 2019

Recipient record

Reports, concerns and published responses

Private and voluntary organisations · Private limited company. 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
100%

Found for named reports

Concerns addressed
1

Across all linked responses

Stated actions
2

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.

100%published responses found
2stated actions described

Topic comparisons are not available in the current evidence snapshot.

Concerns and recipient responses

Statements from Persimmon Homes Limited linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. Avon

    AI-generated summary

    Evie Alicia WRIGHT · 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

    Evie Alicia WRIGHT died immediately after walking onto a railway line near Corondale Crossing and being struck by a train on 6 March 2018. The report raised concerns about the long-delayed provision of a footbridge, which was described as enhancing safety and eliminating the risk associated with the crossing.

    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 Persimmon Homes Limited; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to provide the planned footbridge

    Wider context from the report

    “However I also heard that in the vicinity of the crossing there was planning permission in place to build a footbridge. I have been told that such had been the position since 1991; that it was an obligation on the builder at the time to build a footbridge; that planning permission had been granted in 2000. I heard a number of reasons and explanations why this has not happened. I was told that there are now plans in relation to a new footbridge which is different in construction and that its location has moved hence it requires a fresh planning application and permission. I have heard that a footbridge would enhance safety and eliminate risk, that network rail supports the closure of any crossing but has no power or responsibility – that rests with the North Somerset District Council and the developer – now Persimmon, who it should be noted were not the original developer. ”
    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

    Attend meetings with North Somerset District Council to progress an acceptable solution for preventing future deaths at the crossing.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Since receiving your report, Persimmon has attended two meetings on the 26th March and the 3rd April with North Somerset District Council which have been productive. We understand that North Somerset are now seeking to arrange a further meeting with Network Rail before the 30th May which Persimmon have agreed to attend to explore an acceptable resolution which includes a significant financial contribution to North Somerset District Council & Network Rail in order for the construction to take place.”

    Source location

    2019-0063-Response-by-Persimmon-Homes
    Page 2 · response
    Published 26 May 2019

    Open published response

    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

    Attend a further meeting with North Somerset District Council and Network Rail to explore an acceptable resolution, including construction of a crossing solution.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Since receiving your report, Persimmon has attended two meetings on the 26th March and the 3rd April with North Somerset District Council which have been productive. We understand that North Somerset are now seeking to arrange a further meeting with Network Rail before the 30th May which Persimmon have agreed to attend to explore an acceptable resolution which includes a significant financial contribution to North Somerset District Council & Network Rail in order for the construction to take place.”

    Source location

    2019-0063-Response-by-Persimmon-Homes
    Page 2 · response
    Published 26 May 2019

    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

    Network Rail has responsibility, alongside North Somerset District Council, to find and construct an acceptable solution preventing future deaths.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    ““...that network rail supports the closure of any crossing, but has no power or responsibility......””

    Source location

    2019-0063-Response-by-Persimmon-Homes
    Page 1 · response
    Published 26 May 2019

    Open published response
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

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

How actions were described at the time

This respondent
50%50%
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