Skip to content
recurance

Inadequate signage and lighting at foot crossing

Closely relatedConfidence 0.80 · moderate4 reports · 2014–2018No published response to an earlier report One-page brief (print or PDF)

Network Rail received 4 coroners' reports about this hazard between 27 Feb 2014 and 19 Jun 2018.

They came from 4 different coroners in 4 coroner areas. A similar concern was raised again 3 times after the first warning.

A published response was found for 1 of the 3 earlier reports, stating 0 specific actions.

4
reports
4
different coroners
2014–2018
years
0.80
lowest link confidence

The story, report by report

Spacing grows with the time between reports.

  1. First warning

    Malcolm Potter↗

    27 Feb 2014 · Belinda Cheney · Cambridgeshire (South & West)

    “The warning light for pedestrians is positioned before the gate through which the pedestrian passes before crossing the track.”
    Original on judiciary.uk ↗

    No published response from Network Rail was found for this report.

  2. 1 year 1 month later

    Raised again · 1st time

    Elliott Bignall↗

    23 Mar 2015 · Penelope Schofield · West Sussex

    “the location of the foot crossing was poorly lit and there was inadequate signage at the site warning pedestrians of the dangers associated with the crossings.”
    Original on judiciary.uk ↗

    No published response from Network Rail was found for this report.

  3. 2 years 8 months later

    Raised again · 2nd time

    Sarah Athersmith↗

    30 Nov 2017 · Zafar Siddique · Black Country

    Closely relatedConfidence 0.80 · moderatea different coroner
    “Evidence emerged during the inquest that the Wallows Lane level crossing is an unprotected crossing and there is no method of warning of an approaching train.”
    Original on judiciary.uk ↗

    Repeated from the earlier report:crossingwarning

  4. 7 months later

    Raised again · 3rd time

    Andrew Hanahoe↗

    19 Jun 2018 · Ian Pears · Bedfordshire & Luton

    Closely relatedConfidence 0.80 · moderatea different coroner
    “Ideally this foot crossing should be closed. It crosses railway line that have trains regularly passing over it at speeds up to 125 mph.”
    Original on judiciary.uk ↗

    Repeated from the earlier report:footcrossing

    Network Rail responded.Response (PDF) ↗

  5. All reports to Network Rail

Next

This shows that a similar concern was raised again after an earlier report. It does not say why, and it is not a finding about any organisation or person. To report an error, see the corrections route.

  • Built with
  • NVIDIA Nemotron Nano, Super and Ultra
  • Nebius Token Factory inference
  • Qwen3 Embedding 8B on Token Factory
  • Tavily follow-up web search
  • Postgres and pgvector search
  • Next.js site

Source: Prevention of Future Deaths reports and responses published by the Courts and Tribunals Judiciary at judiciary.uk. Crown copyright, used under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Data updated 26 Oct 2026.

A link shows that a similar concern was raised again, not why. It is not a finding about any organisation or person. Methodology and responsible use · Report an error