Recipient

Recipient name withheld

Pin Request correction

First report 13 Jan 2014•Latest report 13 Jan 2014

Recipient record

Reports, concerns and published responses

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 Recipient name withheld linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. East Sussex

    AI-generated summary

    Mustafa Cicek · 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

    Mustafa Cicek died following a road traffic collision on the A21 when his Ford Fiesta left the carriageway on a bend and struck a fixed structure. The concerns identified included the bend being a collision black spot, inadequate chevron-sign visibility, a potentially hazardous sapling, and the need for a “SLOW” road marking.

    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 Recipient name withheld; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of a SLOW carriageway marking on the approach to the bend

    Wider context from the report

    “(4) Consideration should be given to painting “SLOW” in the carriageway on the approach to the bend. ”
    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 Recipient name withheld; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure of chevron signs to have yellow backgrounds

    Wider context from the report

    “(2) The apparatus along the carriageway, particularly two of the chevron signs, could be improved. There are three chevron signs but only one has a yellow background. If the two chevron signs without a yellow background could have a yellow background added it would further enhance their presence on this bend. ”
    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 Recipient name withheld; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Collision black spot at the bend

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) The bend at this particular location is a collision black spot as there have been several road traffic collisions at the location of Mr Cicek’s collision. ”
    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 Recipient name withheld; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Potential carriageway hazard from a maturing eucalyptus sapling

    Wider context from the report

    “(3) A Eucalyptus sapling has been planted on Highways Agency land between the front fence at ████████ and the edge of the carriageway. This will mature into a potential hazard and consideration should be given to its removal. ”
    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