PFD report

Mohammad Abu FARHAN · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 29 Sep 2021•West Yorkshire (Western)

Report record

Published report and response evidence

This page connects the concerns raised in this report with statements found in recipients’ published responses. A link shows a clear evidence connection; it does not assign responsibility.

View original report
Concerns
1

Raised in this report

Recipients
2

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 2 recipients

Stated actions
1

Described in responses

Recipients and published responses

Source document

Full report text

This is the full text from the original published report.

Open published report

Concerns and recipient responses

Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

Concerns raised1

  1. Failure to maintain prominent and sufficiently explicit signs prohibiting swimming beneath the waterfall
Responses linked to these concerns

Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.

Actions described in response An action is something a recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to a concern raised.1

  1. Action

    Erect additional warning signs around Goit Stock waterfall.

    Stated by Harden & Bingley Park LimitedStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 5 October 2021.

Respondent positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when it does not describe a specific action.2

  1. Position

    Signage at Goit Stock waterfall was not obscured by vegetation and was clearly visible.

    Stated by Harden & Bingley Park LimitedDisputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Failure to maintain prominent and sufficiently explicit signs prohibiting swimming beneath the waterfall

Wider context from the report

“At the inquest I noted from exhibited photographs that the signs prohibiting swimming in the waters under the water fall are obscured by vegetation and appear to be of some age such that I would ask you to consider reviewing the signs in order to make the dangers of swimming more explicit and noticeable. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

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

Erect additional warning signs around Goit Stock waterfall.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We are not this type of park. The woods, beck and waterfall are privately owned with public footpaths. There are no facilities. Our residents our mainly elderly and vulnerable people and they have felt threatened by all the anti-social behaviour. Our local Councillors, police and Community Officers are aware of the situation but, like ourselves, feel completely overwhelmed by the situation. We are powerless to do anything and the police’s resources are too often overstretched to deal with all the anti-social behaviour. However, we will comply with the Coroner’s recommendations and erect some more signs around the area of Goit Stock waterfall. We will forward photos of the proposed signs and where we intend to put them (see attachments). Please look at our proposals and let us know if they are acceptable. We can then get the signs made and erected in the appropriate places.”

Source location

2021-0323-Response-from-Harden-Bingley-Park-Ltd_Published
Page 1 · response
Published 5 October 2021

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

Signage at Goit Stock waterfall was not obscured by vegetation and was clearly visible.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Dear Sirs, We are the owners and directors of Harden & Bingley Park Limited. Goit Stock waterfall where the tragic incident occurred, is on our land. We and our residents were devastated to hear of the death of Mohammed Abu Farhan and once again our condolences go out to his family and friends. We would like to place on record our upset at the way we have been criticised by the report and the media and in particular the BBC. We were not approached by the Coroner prior to the report being published and we do not even know whether there was actually a site visit. If there was a site visit, by them why were we not involved? We dispute certain issues raised in the report. For example, we dispute the fact that signage was obscured by vegetation. This can be proven by the BBC TV report on 31st March when the camera actually zoomed in on the signs and they were clearly visible.”

Source location

2021-0323-Response-from-Harden-Bingley-Park-Ltd_Published
Page 1 · response
Published 5 October 2021

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

Relevant authorities must consider additional measures to prevent accidents because warning signs are vulnerable to vandalism.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We must reiterate that the signs will be vulnerable to vandalism and consequently the relevant authorities need to consider other actions to prevent any further tragic accidents. Regards,”

Source location

2021-0323-Response-from-Harden-Bingley-Park-Ltd_Published
Page 1 · response
Published 5 October 2021

Open published response

Other statements in published responses

These actions and other statements could not be clearly connected to one concern in this report.

Recipient positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when they do not describe a specific action.1

  1. 1

    The owners are powerless to address escalating antisocial behaviour, while police resources are overstretched.

    Stated by Harden & Bingley Park LimitedUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.

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 owners are powerless to address escalating antisocial behaviour, while police resources are overstretched.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We mentioned this when we were asked by the BBC for our comments. They issued a report on their local website and quite disgracefully chose not to include this important point. The signs were placed on that rock face over looking Goit Stock waterfall so that they could not be vandalised. Vandalised signs have been a major issue on the park for many years. We have had to cope with an unprecedented number of visitors to the waterfall since the start of the pandemic. Unfortunately this has increased the amount of anti-social behaviour including drug dealing, used needles being left in the woods, fires being lit, barbecues, all manner of unpleasant waste and litter being dumped. It would appear that word has spread on social media that we are a "leisure park", with shops, toilets etc. As a consequence we have visitors not just from the immediate area but from all over Yorkshire and beyond.”

Source location

2021-0323-Response-from-Harden-Bingley-Park-Ltd_Published
Page 1 · response
Published 5 October 2021

Open published response
Back to top

Information checked against the published report and official responses · Data reviewed 7 Sep 2026 · About data quality and limitations

Data last updated 7 September 2026