Sunderland City Council

Local government · English metropolitan district council

Pin Request correction

First report 14 Nov 2014•Latest report 25 May 2023

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
4

Naming this recipient

Published responses
75%

Found for named reports

Concerns addressed
7

Across all linked responses

Stated actions
10

Described in responses

Concerns and recipient responses

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

  1. Newcastle and North Tyneside

    AI-generated summary

    Jean HARDY · 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

    Jean Hardy, aged 71, crossed the B1286 Doxford Parkway at night at a point without a designated pedestrian crossing and was struck by a motor vehicle. She sustained multiple injuries and died in hospital on 8 February 2020. Concerns included common local crossing at non-designated points, lack of fencing and warning signage, and a risk of further deaths requiring a comprehensive review of pedestrian crossing provision.

    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 Sunderland City Council; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to restrict pedestrian access to the carriageway

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) The B1286 Doxford Parkway is bordered by Multiple housing estates and the evidence confirmed that local practice of crossing at non designated crossing points which are more easily accessible and convenient is common and well known. (2) Access to the carriageway is not restricted by fencing (save for limited fencing at designated crossing points) and there is no signage prohibiting crossing at non designated crossing points or warning of the risks to the public of doing so. (3) There is a risk of further deaths occurring in this location and in similar circumstances. To prevent future deaths there should be a comprehensive review of current pedestrian crossing provision on B1286 Doxford Parkway. ”
    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 Sunderland City Council; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to provide signage prohibiting non-designated crossing or warning of crossing risks

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) The B1286 Doxford Parkway is bordered by Multiple housing estates and the evidence confirmed that local practice of crossing at non designated crossing points which are more easily accessible and convenient is common and well known. (2) Access to the carriageway is not restricted by fencing (save for limited fencing at designated crossing points) and there is no signage prohibiting crossing at non designated crossing points or warning of the risks to the public of doing so. (3) There is a risk of further deaths occurring in this location and in similar circumstances. To prevent future deaths there should be a comprehensive review of current pedestrian crossing provision on B1286 Doxford Parkway. ”
    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 Sunderland City Council; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Inadequate provision of accessible designated pedestrian crossing points

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) The B1286 Doxford Parkway is bordered by Multiple housing estates and the evidence confirmed that local practice of crossing at non designated crossing points which are more easily accessible and convenient is common and well known. (2) Access to the carriageway is not restricted by fencing (save for limited fencing at designated crossing points) and there is no signage prohibiting crossing at non designated crossing points or warning of the risks to the public of doing so. (3) There is a risk of further deaths occurring in this location and in similar circumstances. To prevent future deaths there should be a comprehensive review of current pedestrian crossing provision on B1286 Doxford Parkway. ”
    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

    Complete a road safety review of the location and assess the suitability of existing pedestrian crossing points.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In response to your concerns and request for action, the Council has undertaken a road safety review of the location concerned; and has also investigated the suitability of the existing pedestrian crossing point locations on Doxford Park Way. The issues you have raised around provision of fencing within a central grassed reservation and signing has been considered. This was discussed on site, and the view of the Police is that this would encourage barrier hopping by more agile pedestrians and would not be supported by them.”

    Source location

    Response from Sunderland City Council
    Page 2 · response
    Published 2 June 2023

    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

    Install signs on both sides of Doxford Parkway directing pedestrians to nearby crossing points.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “As an action, the Council are proposing to install signing on both sides of Doxford Parkway to direct pedestrians to nearby crossing points.”

    Source location

    Response from Sunderland City Council
    Page 2 · response
    Published 2 June 2023

    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

    Additional fencing was not supported because it was considered likely to encourage barrier hopping by more agile pedestrians.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In response to your concerns and request for action, the Council has undertaken a road safety review of the location concerned; and has also investigated the suitability of the existing pedestrian crossing point locations on Doxford Park Way. The issues you have raised around provision of fencing within a central grassed reservation and signing has been considered. This was discussed on site, and the view of the Police is that this would encourage barrier hopping by more agile pedestrians and would not be supported by them.”

    Source location

    Response from Sunderland City Council
    Page 2 · response
    Published 2 June 2023

    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

    Existing footways and nearby pedestrian crossings were considered adequate provision at the collision location.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “It is unknown why Mrs Hardy chose to cross at the location where the collision occurred; however, it should be noted that there is an existing footway following the northern side of Doxford Park Way and appropriately located pedestrian crossing points nearby to this location. These are found at the roundabout junction with Moorside Road / Noirnmont Way approximately 120 metres to the west, and a controlled crossing approximately 180 metres to the east near Morrison’s and the local shopping centre.”

    Source location

    Response from Sunderland City Council
    Page 1 · response
    Published 2 June 2023

    Open published response

  2. Sunderland

    AI-generated summary

    Gary Ronald Sloan · 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

    Gary Ronald Sloan died after his vehicle aquaplaned on surface water, left the Eastbound A690 carriageway, went down an embankment and collided with a tree. Speed and an underinflated tyre were factors, and concerns were raised about repeated collisions at the same location, the possible need to review safety restrictions, and the drainage and surface-water clearance arrangements.

    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 Sunderland City Council; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Concentration of road traffic collisions on the A690 section between High Lane and A182

    Wider context from the report

    “Following the Police Road Traffic Collision Report, I heard evidence that there were 15 slight injury, 4 serious injury and 2 fatal (including this incident) road traffic collisions on the A690 between the junction with High Lane to the East and A182 to the West between 31st October 2014 and 31st October 2019. Although this section of the A690 does not automatically qualify for the installation of a safety road restriction system, as this was the second fatal road traffic collision at the exact location and the same tree, the decision may need to be reviewed together with a reassessment of the drainage and clearance of surface water schedule. ”
    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 Sunderland City Council; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Recurrent fatal road traffic collisions at the exact location of the same tree

    Wider context from the report

    “Following the Police Road Traffic Collision Report, I heard evidence that there were 15 slight injury, 4 serious injury and 2 fatal (including this incident) road traffic collisions on the A690 between the junction with High Lane to the East and A182 to the West between 31st October 2014 and 31st October 2019. Although this section of the A690 does not automatically qualify for the installation of a safety road restriction system, as this was the second fatal road traffic collision at the exact location and the same tree, the decision may need to be reviewed together with a reassessment of the drainage and clearance of surface water schedule. ”
    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

    Complete a road safety scheme at the High Lane–A690 junction.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In terms of the stretch of road in question, the council takes its responsibilities for road safety seriously and as such in 2016 a road safety scheme was completed at the High Lane-A690 Junction which has since resulted in a reduction in accidents. In addition, the council has recently introduced an order which bans U turns along this length of the A690 to reduce the risk of unnecessary vehicle conflict, plans of which are attached for your records.”

    Source location

    2020-0009-Response-from-Sunderland-City-Council-Redacted
    Page 1 · response
    Published 8 February 2020

    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

    Include a vehicle restraint scheme for the location in the 2020–2021 capital programme.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “I note your acceptance that this section of road would be considered low risk when determining the installation of a Vehicle Restraint System, however I can state that the council will look to include a scheme in its 2020-2021 capital programme which will mitigate the risk of serious injury to drivers at this location.”

    Source location

    2020-0009-Response-from-Sunderland-City-Council-Redacted
    Page 1 · response
    Published 8 February 2020

    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

    Introduce an order banning U-turns along the relevant length of the A690.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In terms of the stretch of road in question, the council takes its responsibilities for road safety seriously and as such in 2016 a road safety scheme was completed at the High Lane-A690 Junction which has since resulted in a reduction in accidents. In addition, the council has recently introduced an order which bans U turns along this length of the A690 to reduce the risk of unnecessary vehicle conflict, plans of which are attached for your records.”

    Source location

    2020-0009-Response-from-Sunderland-City-Council-Redacted
    Page 1 · response
    Published 8 February 2020

    Open published response

  3. Newcastle upon Tyne

    AI-generated summary

    Liam Hall · 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 30 August 2016, 17-year-old Liam Hall drowned after leaving an inflatable dinghy in the sea at Roker Beach, despite having very limited swimming ability. The concerns identified were the absence of warning signage about the risks of entering the water and using inflatable devices, and the absence of lifeguard supervision in the harbour 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 Sunderland City Council; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of lifeguard supervision in the Roker Harbour area

    Wider context from the report

    “[BRIEF SUMMARY OF MATTERS OF CONCERN] (1) No appropriate signage warning of the risks of entering the water and of the increased risks associated with the use of inflatable devices in the Roker Harbour area. (2) No lifeguard supervision in that 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 Sunderland City Council; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of appropriate signage warning of water-entry risks and increased risks from inflatable devices in the Roker Harbour area

    Wider context from the report

    “[BRIEF SUMMARY OF MATTERS OF CONCERN] (1) No appropriate signage warning of the risks of entering the water and of the increased risks associated with the use of inflatable devices in the Roker Harbour area. (2) No lifeguard supervision in that area. ”
    Open source report

  4. Sunderland

    AI-generated summary

    Dolores Mary Hubbert · 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

    Dolores Mary Hubbert suffered fatal injuries in a vehicle collision at a crossroads on the A690 at East Rainton and was pronounced dead at hospital on 29 August 2014. Her family raised concerns about the safety of the junction, including speed restrictions and the frequency of grass cutting, which might obscure drivers’ views.

    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 Sunderland City Council; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Inadequate speed restrictions before and after a junction

    Wider context from the report

    “The family of Mrs Hubbert expressed concerns to me about the overall safety of the junction and in particular the speed restrictions before and after the junction as well as the policy with regard to the frequency of grass cutting as longer grass may have the potential to obscure the views of drivers. ”
    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 Sunderland City Council; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Insufficient grass-cutting frequency allowing longer grass to obscure drivers' views

    Wider context from the report

    “The family of Mrs Hubbert expressed concerns to me about the overall safety of the junction and in particular the speed restrictions before and after the junction as well as the policy with regard to the frequency of grass cutting as longer grass may have the potential to obscure the views of drivers. ”
    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

    Commence the statutory process to reduce the A690 speed limit to 50 mph in January 2015.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We have also been undertaking a review of speed limits throughout the city with priority being given to investigating those on “principal” roads. The A690 falls under this criteria and we intend to commence the statutory process to reduce the speed limit to 50mph on this section of road in January 2015. Subject to a successful statutory consultation it is expected that the speed reduction could be introduced in summer 2015.”

    Source location

    Response from Sunderland City Council
    Page 2 · response
    Published 14 November 2014

    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

    Undertake an assessment of possible safety measures at the A690/Durham Road, East Rainton junction during 2015.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “As a consequence of this regular view, the Council has already identified the nearby A690/High Lane/Stoneygate junction as a site of concern as regards safety with 11 personal injury accidents in the last 3 years. We have been a progressing a scheme of measures to address these concerns. Extensive public consultations are about to commence and a scheme will be presented to a Planning and Highways Committee for final approval early next year, with a view to implementing the scheme during the financial year 2015/16. As the next major at grade crossing point on the A690, a similar assessment of possible measures for the A690/Durham Road, East Rainton junction will be programmed to be undertaken in 2015. It is not possible to be specific as to what measures will be the most suitable for this location until the investigation and consultation has been completed.”

    Source location

    Response from Sunderland City Council
    Page 2 · response
    Published 14 November 2014

    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

    Continue reviewing speed limits across the city, prioritising principal roads including the A690.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We have also been undertaking a review of speed limits throughout the city with priority being given to investigating those on “principal” roads. The A690 falls under this criteria and we intend to commence the statutory process to reduce the speed limit to 50mph on this section of road in January 2015. Subject to a successful statutory consultation it is expected that the speed reduction could be introduced in summer 2015.”

    Source location

    Response from Sunderland City Council
    Page 2 · response
    Published 14 November 2014

    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

    Further traffic management intervention at the junction was not considered necessary because its accident record was comparatively good.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Council as Highway Authority, regularly assess the accident data throughout the city to determine where additional traffic management measures are needed and are appropriate. The safety record at this junction was regarded as good, compared to other locations in the city. Priority is given to implementing measures that help reduce the number and severity of personal injury accidents, improve child pedestrian safety at locations that show a significant accident history and which are in line with the Council’s overall transport strategy. With the junction having previously had a comparatively good safety record, intervention has not been considered necessary.”

    Source location

    Response from Sunderland City Council
    Page 2 · response
    Published 14 November 2014

    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 established spring and autumn maintenance closure programme was considered appropriate for the A690 location.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “With regards to maintenance activity on the A690, the Council's approach over the years for all principal high speed roads has been to implement a programme of Spring and Autumn closures to facilitate work such as servicing of road gullies, grass cutting, street cleansing, safety barrier and lighting repairs . This year the lane closures on this section of the A690 took place on 27th/28th March and 22nd/23rd September. This schedule was in line with the Council’s intended programme set at the start of the year and is considered to be appropriate to the location in question.”

    Source location

    Response from Sunderland City Council
    Page 2 · response
    Published 14 November 2014

    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