PFD report

Andrew PHRYDAS · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 15 Nov 2013•Inner North London

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
2

Raised in this report

Recipients
1

Named on the report

Responses found
0

Of 1 recipient

Stated actions
0

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 raised2

  1. Failure to have a process to shut down both lines simultaneously at an intersecting station
  2. Failure to alert the driver by the most direct and effective method about a person’s presence on the track
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable railway-station detection and alerting for persons on the line
Responses linked to these concerns

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

No linked response statements

No respondent-stated action or position is clearly linked to these concerns.

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 have a process to shut down both lines simultaneously at an intersecting station

Wider context from the report

“Although a person in the tunnel was an unprecedented event, there was a failure by London Underground to have a process in place to shut down both lines simultaneously at a station where two lines intersect. There was also a failure by London Underground to alert the driver in the most direct and effective method about Andrew’s presence on the track. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

Open source report

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 alert the driver by the most direct and effective method about a person’s presence on the track

Wider context from the report

“Although a person in the tunnel was an unprecedented event, there was a failure by London Underground to have a process in place to shut down both lines simultaneously at a station where two lines intersect. There was also a failure by London Underground to alert the driver in the most direct and effective method about Andrew’s presence on the track. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable railway-station detection and alerting for persons on the line.

Open source report
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