PFD report

SIMON DENNIS CHARLES · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 28 Dec 2016•Cornwall and Isles of Scilly

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
1

Of 1 recipient

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 raised2

  1. Lack of natural barriers at the edge of the cliff at Hells Mouth
    Part of recurring concern: Inadequate control of falls risksPart of recurring concern: Inadequate physical barriers preventing access to dangerous drops or areas
  2. Lack of suicide support agency telephone numbers at Hells Mouth
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to provide accessible suicide-prevention service information to people at risk
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

    Investigate options for installing safety signage at Hells Mouth with Cornwall Samaritans.

    Stated by The National Trust For Places Of Historic Interest Or Natural BeautyStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 28 December 2016.

Respondent positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when it does not describe a specific action.1

  1. Position

    Vegetation cannot feasibly prevent cliff-edge access and could encourage visitors into more dangerous positions, increasing accidental trip and fall risks.

    Stated by The National Trust For Places Of Historic Interest Or Natural BeautyUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.

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

Lack of natural barriers at the edge of the cliff at Hells Mouth

Wider context from the report

“The Family and others at inquest raised concerns that there are not more preventive measures (apart from a fence) to those contemplating suicide (or undertaking risky behaviour) at Hells Mouth, which is a renowned suicide location in Cornwall. They provided examples of the type of measures which they felt could additionally be put in place such as: • Providing the telephone number of suicide support agencies such as the Samaritans in the same way as at Beachy Head, East Sussex • Using natural barriers at the edge of the cliff such as encouraging or planting gorse or other such plants as in Devon along the coast line especially where falls have been known to have occurred The coastline around Cornwall and in particular, the area around Hells Mouth are owned by the National Trust. It would require the consent of the National Trust to put up such signs or other preventative measures and this is the reason for raising the concerns with you and your organisation. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Inadequate control of falls risks; Inadequate physical barriers preventing access to dangerous drops or areas.

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

Lack of suicide support agency telephone numbers at Hells Mouth

Wider context from the report

“The Family and others at inquest raised concerns that there are not more preventive measures (apart from a fence) to those contemplating suicide (or undertaking risky behaviour) at Hells Mouth, which is a renowned suicide location in Cornwall. They provided examples of the type of measures which they felt could additionally be put in place such as: • Providing the telephone number of suicide support agencies such as the Samaritans in the same way as at Beachy Head, East Sussex • Using natural barriers at the edge of the cliff such as encouraging or planting gorse or other such plants as in Devon along the coast line especially where falls have been known to have occurred The coastline around Cornwall and in particular, the area around Hells Mouth are owned by the National Trust. It would require the consent of the National Trust to put up such signs or other preventative measures and this is the reason for raising the concerns with you and your organisation. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to provide accessible suicide-prevention service information to people at risk.

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

Investigate options for installing safety signage at Hells Mouth with Cornwall Samaritans.

Verbatim wording from the response

“I can confirm that our local team are in contact with ████████ Director of Cornwall Samaritans, to investigate options for introducing signage at Hells Mouth. The initial thought from our staff is that it would be most practical to have small signs on the barrier near the cliff edge and potentially larger signs in the car park of the café opposite (where Mr Charles’ parked van was found). The latter would require the agreement of the café owners.”

Source location

2016-0465-Response-by-National-Trust.pdf
Page 1 · response
Published 28 December 2016

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

Vegetation cannot feasibly prevent cliff-edge access and could encourage visitors into more dangerous positions, increasing accidental trip and fall risks.

Verbatim wording from the response

“With regards to the suggestion that vegetation could be planted to prevent access to the cliff edge, we believe this would be difficult to achieve and counterproductive. The exposed nature of the cliff top in this area limits the natural growth of shrubs and we feel it would not be possible to establish sufficient growth to prevent physical access to the cliff. The impact on the views that screening by vegetation would produce would, in our view, encourage visitors to circumvent such a barrier and put themselves in a potentially much more dangerous position, leading to a greater chance of accidental trips and falls.”

Source location

2016-0465-Response-by-National-Trust.pdf
Page 1 · response
Published 28 December 2016

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