PFD report

Lee Michael FRIEND · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 6 Aug 2014•Surrey

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
7

Raised in this report

Recipients
4

Named on the report

Responses found
0

Of 4 recipients

Stated actions
0

Described in 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.

Report evidence summary

Concerns raised7

  1. Lack of operative guidance or training on placing traffic lights near blind bends
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable safety controls for temporary traffic management schemesPart of recurring concern: Unsafe street works setup and control
  2. Lack of a clear route for locating the person responsible for placing road works
    Part of recurring concern: Unsafe street works setup and control
  3. Failure to pass public calls about serious road-network safety issues directly to those responsible for action
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable capture and onward use of telephone helpline information
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

Lack of operative guidance or training on placing traffic lights near blind bends

Wider context from the report

“1. Action is required to ensure that when temporary traffic lights are placed there is a minimum distance of visibility (line of sight) between approaching drivers and the temporary traffic light heads. Further, guidance or training should be provided to operatives as to placing traffic lights near to blind bends or where waiting traffic will encroach upon blind bends. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable safety controls for temporary traffic management schemes; Unsafe street works setup and control.

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 a clear route for locating the person responsible for placing road works

Wider context from the report

“2. Action is required by Surrey Police to formulate a clear policy/protocol for all Officers to follow when they identify a risk created to the public by road works which should include a clear route allow them to locate who is responsible for the placing of the road works if not apologies board is seen/present. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unsafe street works setup and control.

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 pass public calls about serious road-network safety issues directly to those responsible for action

Wider context from the report

“3. Action is required by Reigate and Banstead Council to ensure that any calls from members of the public to the Council about serious safety issues relating to the road network are passed directly to those with responsibility to take action. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable capture and onward use of telephone helpline information.

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 carry out effective risk assessments for road works

Wider context from the report

“4. Action is required by Sutton and East Surrey Water to take steps to ensure all members of staff are fully and properly trained in the safe setting up of road works and the carrying out of effective risk assessments. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable highway safety risk assessment and remedial-work prioritisation.

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

Insufficient visibility distance between approaching drivers and temporary traffic light heads

Wider context from the report

“1. Action is required to ensure that when temporary traffic lights are placed there is a minimum distance of visibility (line of sight) between approaching drivers and the temporary traffic light heads. Further, guidance or training should be provided to operatives as to placing traffic lights near to blind bends or where waiting traffic will encroach upon blind bends. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable safety controls for temporary traffic management schemes.

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

Inadequate staff training in the safe setting up of road works

Wider context from the report

“4. Action is required by Sutton and East Surrey Water to take steps to ensure all members of staff are fully and properly trained in the safe setting up of road works and the carrying out of effective risk assessments. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unsafe street works setup and control.

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 a clear police policy or protocol for responding to public risks created by road works

Wider context from the report

“2. Action is required by Surrey Police to formulate a clear policy/protocol for all Officers to follow when they identify a risk created to the public by road works which should include a clear route allow them to locate who is responsible for the placing of the road works if not apologies board is seen/present. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

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

Official responses located
0/4

Data last updated 7 September 2026

No official response is included in the current published snapshot.