Surrey Police have confirmed that 10 people have now been arrested as part of an ongoing investigation into violent disorder in Epsom town centre earlier this month.
The arrests relate to incidents on Wednesday 15 April and Monday 20 April, when protests escalated into disorder in the town centre.
In a detailed update published on 5 May by Surrey Police, officers set out the ages and home areas of those arrested, showing a mix of local individuals and others from outside the immediate area.
The arrests were carried out over several days:
On 17 April, an 18-year-old man from Banstead was arrested on suspicion of public order offences.
On 20 April, a 23-year-old man from Richmond-upon-Thames was arrested on suspicion of public order offences and was further arrested on suspicion of criminal damage.
On 21 April: • a 21-year-old man from Epsom was arrested on suspicion of public order offences • a 20-year-old man of no fixed address was arrested on suspicion of public order offences • a 15-year-old boy from Purley was arrested on suspicion of public order offences and further arrested on suspicion of criminal damage
On 23 April: • a 12-year-old boy from Epsom was arrested on suspicion of public order offences • a 12-year-old girl from Epsom was arrested on suspicion of public order offences • an 11-year-old boy from Epsom was arrested on suspicion of public order offences
On 24 April, a 16-year-old boy from Leatherhead was arrested on suspicion of public order offences.
On 27 April, a 20-year-old man from Epsom was arrested on suspicion of public order offences.
Police confirmed that all 10 individuals have been released on bail with conditions, and that enquiries are continuing.
The latest update follows an earlier statement on 23 April in which five arrests were initially confirmed. At that stage, those detained were identified as a 15-year-old boy from Purley, an 18-year-old man from Banstead, a 20-year-old man of no fixed address, a 21-year-old man from Epsom, and a 23-year-old man from Richmond-upon-Thames.
Detective Chief Superintendent Jon Groenen said: “Whilst we support the right to lawful protest, we will investigate those suspected of committing criminal offences and causing damage, disruption, and disorder.
“We continue to review footage to identify those responsible and will take appropriate action against them.”
The investigation remains ongoing, with officers continuing to examine CCTV, social media and body-worn video footage.
Classroom to Cruise: Epsom Student Wins Luxury Family Trip
5 May 2026
A Nescot student has won a luxury seven-night family cruise after taking part in an innovative work experience programme that swaps the classroom for life at sea.
Travel and Tourism students from North East Surrey College of Technology (Nescot) in Epsom joined peers from Itchen College, Southampton, on a five-day river cruise through Germany and the Netherlands as part of the Cruise Career Springboard initiative. The programme brings together education and the cruise industry, giving students hands-on experience while promoting careers in the sector.
During the trip aboard the VIVA Enjoy, students were tasked with creating social media content, planning excursions, and developing marketing ideas aimed at attracting younger travellers. The experience combined practical learning with the realities of working in a fast-moving hospitality and tourism environment.
Among the group was 17-year-old Jordyn Leyland McKenzie, whose work stood out and ultimately secured her the programme’s top prize — an all-inclusive seven-night cruise for her family on the Rhine or Danube.
Jordyn said she had little idea what to expect when she first joined the programme.
“When I first joined the Cruise Career Springboard programme as part of our Travel and Tourism course, I had no idea I’d actually get the opportunity to go on a cruise. We found out later that a small group of us would get that chance by producing a presentation which impressed our tutors. I was over the moon when I found out I was one of the lucky ones.”
Reflecting on the trip itself, she described it as far more immersive than she had imagined.
“We went on a four-day cruise on the VIVA Enjoy. On the first day, we had to post snapshots of the cruise on our social media stories. We also made a small video showing the rooms and the excursions, which I ended up using in my final presentation. My personal highlights were definitely the beautiful three-course meals, the hot tub on the top deck, and going on a bike ride in Amsterdam using the bikes VIVA kept on the boat. We saw so much, it felt like we were there for ages — it was just amazing.”
After returning to the UK, students were invited to compete for the top prize through a second presentation. Jordyn took a creative approach, producing a TikTok-style promotional video aimed at younger audiences, alongside a quiz and a mock brand partnership idea.
“I adored the first experience so much, I was 100% up for the challenge,” she said. “I did a TikTok video in an ‘influencer style’ to show how they could promote the cruise to younger people. I also created a quiz and an example of a brand partnership that might work for the company.”
The result was announced during an online meeting at Nescot, with students gathered in a classroom and judges joining via video call.
“We had to wait a month to find out the results. We were all dressed smartly at college and the judges were on a Zoom call. When they eventually said my name, I didn’t even hear it at first until I saw everyone looking at me. I was lost for words. After the call, they filmed me ringing my mum who was so excited. I can’t even believe it’s real.”
She said the experience had a lasting impact on her confidence and ambitions.
“The Cruise Career Springboard experience has pushed me out of my comfort zone and really boosted my confidence. It’s been incredible, and now I get to treat my family to a seven-night, all-inclusive trip. I’m just so grateful for the opportunity.”
Julie Kapsalis MBE, Principal and CEO of Nescot, said the programme demonstrates the value of giving students real-world opportunities beyond the classroom.
“We always work to give our students real-world experiences and swapping the classroom for a cruise must be one of the most exciting we’ve ever offered,” she said. “The programme develops confidence, self-belief and communication skills, while also giving the industry insight into how to attract a younger generation of customers.”
Industry representatives involved in judging also praised the quality of the students’ work. Michelle Daniels of VIVA Cruises said she took away ideas for her marketing team, while mentor Graham Sadler highlighted the transformation in students’ confidence and engagement over the course of the programme.
The Cruise Career Springboard initiative, founded by Matthew and Edwina Lonsdale, brings together education providers and cruise industry professionals, with nearly 100 individuals contributing their time to support young people considering careers at sea.
Teacher banned after fake war-zone stories to Epsom and Ewell pupils
5 May 2026
A former Epsom and Ewell High School maths teacher has been banned from teaching after a professional conduct panel found she fabricated stories to pupils about being in the army, going to war zones and suffering serious combat injuries.
The Teaching Regulation Agency report, published by GOV.UK, says Alexandra Slay began work as a maths teacher at Epsom and Ewell High School in December 2016 and became Head of Year on 26 May 2023. Concerns were raised in August 2023 about her communications with a pupil, leading to referrals to the Local Authority Designated Officer and police. The police informed the school on 18 September 2023 that they would not be continuing their investigation. Miss Slay resigned on 9 November 2023 and was referred to the TRA in December 2023.
The panel found proved that, between 2019 and 2023, Miss Slay gave her personal mobile number or personal email address to one or more pupils, sent inappropriate or over-familiar messages, shared details of her personal life, and fabricated stories about “being in a conflict and/or war zone and/or sustaining injuries”.
The official report says Miss Slay “appeared to have fabricated a narrative to pupils which involved her having a role in the army, where she would often take trips to war zones, undertake training and/or be involved in conflict.” In her disciplinary interview, when asked about the messages, she said they were “all fabricated” and added: “I made up the lie to feel that I belong, was a part of the world.”
The Times reported that Miss Slay had falsely claimed to have served in the Australian army and had sent one pupil more than 2,500 emails and other messages. It also reported that messages from an invented “Lieutenant Danny Blackburn” described her supposed combat injuries.
The TRA decision records that messages said to be from “Lt. Danny Blackburn” included claims that “Cpt Slay’s body is at a weak stage” and that she was being put on oxygen. Other messages referred to gunshot wounds, “severe amounts of blood”, cardiac arrest and having “flatlined”. The panel found the fabricated injury messages had the potential to cause stress and alarm to pupils.
The panel also found Miss Slay had failed to maintain appropriate teacher-pupil relationships and had instead developed relationships “more akin to friendships”. It found she had breached the Teachers’ Standards, including the requirements to observe proper professional boundaries and safeguard pupils’ wellbeing.
In deciding sanction, the panel said prohibition was “both proportionate and appropriate”, noting that Miss Slay had developed inappropriate relationships with a number of children through “highly inappropriate and unprofessional communications” and had failed to report multiple safeguarding concerns. The Secretary of State’s decision-maker imposed a prohibition order.
The order prevents Miss Slay from teaching indefinitely in any school, sixth-form college, relevant youth accommodation or children’s home in England. She may apply for it to be set aside, but not until 21 April 2028.
A call to vote at the new East Surrey Council election 7th May
5 May 2026
Voters Urged to Have Their Say in First East and West Surrey Council Elections
With just one week to go until polling day on Thursday 7 May, voters across Surrey are being urged to take part in the first elections for the new East Surrey and West Surrey unitary councils.
The vote marks a major step in the reorganisation of local government across the county. From 1 April 2027, the new councils will assume responsibility for all key local services currently split between county and district/borough councils. These include education, waste collection, highways, housing, planning, children’s services, adult social care and more.
Those elected next week will initially sit on Shadow Authorities for East and West Surrey. These bodies will oversee the transition to the new system, including setting budgets and council tax levels, agreeing staffing structures and governance arrangements, adopting codes of conduct, and preparing for the transfer of services ahead of vesting day.
Mari Roberts-Wood, Returning Officer for the East Surrey elections, said: “These elections are your opportunity to choose who represents you on your new council and makes decisions on important local matters, including how the council is set up, so be sure to use your vote.”
Andrew Pritchard, Returning Officer for the West Surrey elections, added: “Electors will be able to vote for up to two different candidates to represent their ward. Remember, your vote is your decision and yours alone. You do not need to tell anyone how you voted.”
Polling stations open 7am–10pm
Polling stations will be open from 7am to 10pm on Thursday 7 May. Voters attending in person must bring an accepted form of photo ID. Without it, you will not be able to vote and will be asked to return with valid identification.
Accepted forms of ID include a UK, EEA or Commonwealth passport, a UK or EEA driving licence, biometric immigration documents, and certain concessionary travel passes such as an older person’s bus pass or an Oyster 60+ card. A free Voter Authority Certificate is also valid. Expired ID can still be used if the photograph remains a good likeness, but the name must match the electoral register.
Voters are advised to check their poll card carefully before attending, as polling station locations may have changed. You do not need your poll card to vote, but it provides useful details including your polling station.
You can find your polling station, ward, and a list of candidates by entering your postcode here:
If you have lost your poll card, you can still vote.
Those voting as a proxy must attend the polling station allocated to the person they are voting on behalf of, not their own.
Postal voting guidance
If you are voting by post, it is important to follow the instructions carefully to ensure your vote is counted. You may vote for up to two candidates where applicable.
Make sure you: complete your ballot paper in secret fill in the postal voting statement correctly place all documents in the correct envelopes seal the envelope yourself
Postal votes should be returned as soon as possible. If you are unable to post it in time, you can hand it in at a polling station up to 10pm on polling day.
Emergency proxy voting
If you are unable to vote in person due to illness, an emergency, or because your photo ID has been lost or damaged, you can apply for an emergency proxy vote until 5pm on polling day.
Polling stations are equipped to support voters with additional needs. This includes accessible entrances, low-level polling booths and assistance from trained staff. Voters are encouraged to ask for help if required.
Further information
You can find more details about the elections, including wards and candidates, at: surreylgrhub.gov.uk/elections
For broader information about the local government reorganisation in Surrey, visit: surreylgrhub.gov.uk
For residents without internet access, local electoral services teams at district and borough councils can provide assistance by phone.
The 7 May elections represent the first stage in establishing the new unitary councils, which will replace Surrey’s current two-tier system in April 2027.
Two senior Residents Association Epsom and Ewell Borough Council figures have refused to answer questions from Epsom and Ewell Times, both claiming pre-election restrictions under the Local Government Act 1986 — prompting fresh concerns over transparency and accountability at a time when public scrutiny is arguably most important.
Cllr Neil Dallen (RA Town Ward) is standing with his daughter Lucie McIntyre for election to the East Surrey Unitary Council in the West Ewell Division and Cllr Hannah Dalton (RA Stoneleigh) is standing in the same 7th May election in the Ewell Village, Stoneleigh and Nonsuch Division.
In both cases, Section 2 of the Act — which prohibits councils from publishing material designed to influence support for a political party — has been relied upon to justify a refusal to respond. However, expert advice provided to Epsom and Ewell Times indicates that the provision is directed at political publicity, not factual explanations of decisions already taken, and does not require councils or councillors to remain silent when asked legitimate questions about the use of public powers and resources.
Rainbow Leisure Centre: £500,000 repairs and unanswered questions – the case concerning Cllr Neil Dallen
The first case concerns the Council’s handling of the Rainbow Leisure Centre following a change of operator in October 2025.
A confidential urgent decision taken in December stated: “The costs of the dilapidations are not yet fully known… However, an estimate is that this could cost up to £500k.”
The same document recorded a wide range of issues affecting the building, including fire alarms, lifts, ventilation, damp and possible roof defects, with some matters raising health and safety concerns requiring immediate action.
Such costs are not unusual over the lifetime of a large public building. But they are typically managed through regular inspection and timely maintenance. When issues are identified early, they can be addressed incrementally and at lower cost. When they are not, problems can accumulate — and costs can escalate sharply.
The central question therefore remains: how did a building that had just been handed over from one operator to another without closure come to present a potential £500,000 repair liability within weeks?
Conflicting accounts of the building’s condition
The former operator, Greenwich Leisure Limited (GLL), has maintained that the building was handed back in the condition required under its contract. It stated that the Council commissioned a full survey prior to handover, that all identified works were completed, and that these were signed off on the Council’s behalf.
GLL has further confirmed that the Council provided a condition survey to all tenderers as part of the tender process.
In contrast, the incoming operator, Places Leisure, identified extensive defects shortly after taking over, including issues said to affect the safe operation of the building.
Either the building was handed over in an acceptable condition following survey and sign-off, or significant defects existed which were not addressed and may have been present for some time.
No inspection records despite long-standing rights
In response to Freedom of Information requests, the Council confirmed that it held contractual rights to inspect the building throughout GLL’s 22-year tenure.
However, it also stated that it holds no inspection or survey reports prior to 2025.
If accurate, that absence of records raises further questions about how any accumulating defects — if they existed — were monitored, recorded or addressed over such a prolonged period.
The missing survey and disputed confidentiality
At the centre of the dispute lies the condition survey said to have been carried out prior to handover.
The Council has refused to disclose that survey, citing legal professional privilege and the possibility of litigation. Yet the same document was provided to tenderers, including GLL, during the procurement process.
GLL has indicated that it has access to the survey but has declined to provide it to Epsom and Ewell Times.
This leaves a situation in which a document said to be too sensitive for public disclosure appears to have been shared among commercial parties — raising questions as to whether the exemption is being applied too broadly.
If the survey identified the defects now being asserted, questions arise as to why the incoming operator proceeded with the contract before those issues were resolved. If it did not, questions arise as to whether the survey was incomplete or inaccurate, and who was responsible for its preparation.
Competing explanations
A number of explanations remain possible.
It may be that the former operator’s account is correct and the current dispute reflects differing interpretations of the building’s condition.
It may be that defects accumulated over time and were not identified or addressed due to a failure to exercise inspection rights effectively.
It may be that the survey itself failed to identify the true condition of the building.
Or it may be that the scale of dilapidations has been overstated or differently assessed by the new operator, which is carrying out repairs in return for a reduced management fee shortly after securing the contract through a competitive tender process.
At present, none of these explanations has been confirmed, and key documents remain undisclosed.
Refusal to answer questions
Epsom and Ewell Times put a series of questions to the Council and to Cllr Neil Dallen, Chair of the Strategy and Resources Committee, who supported the urgent decision and its initial classification as confidential.
The response received stated: “We cannot provide any further response as we are within the pre-election period and must follow restrictions governed by Section 2 of the Local Government Act 1986.”
Epsom and Ewell Times submitted a Freedom of Information request seeking to establish who advised that Section 2 applied in these circumstances. At the time of publication, no response had been received within the statutory timeframe.
Second case: Dalton and the FSA submission
A similar position has been taken by Cllr Dalton in relation to a separate matter concerning the signing of a submission connected to proposals for a new tier of local governance, referred to as an FSA (Foundation Strategic Authority).
Questions were put to Cllr Dalton as to the basis on which the submission was signed by her as leader of the ruling Residents Association group and whether it had received the necessary Council authority. Those questions have not been answered, with reliance again placed on alleged pre-election restrictions.
Expert advice
Expert advice provided to Epsom and Ewell Times by Nathan Elvery, former Chief Executive Officer of Croydon Council and now Director of Imagine Public Services Ltd, states: “The questions posed… are factual in character… A factual response explaining what occurred and why would not constitute political publicity within the meaning of the Act… The Council is not being asked to promote a political position; it is being asked to account for its stewardship of public funds.”
He added that reliance on Section 2 in such circumstances risks appearing as “a mechanism to avoid scrutiny during a period when accountability arguably matters most.”
The same advice notes that Section 2 applies to councils as corporate bodies and does not impose a personal duty of silence on councillors responding to press enquiries about decisions they have supported.
Transparency or silence?
The common thread in both cases is the use of Section 2 of the Local Government Act 1986 to justify a refusal to engage with questions about decisions already taken.
The law requires councils to avoid political publicity. It does not require them to avoid explaining themselves.
At a time when significant public decisions are under scrutiny — including those involving large sums of public money — the question for residents is whether the current approach reflects appropriate caution, or an avoidance of accountability.
Police confirm a female’s report of Epsom gang-rape was false
5 May 2026
In a statement issued by Surrey Police the report by a female of being the victim of rape by several men in Epsom on Saturday 11th April near the Methodist Church, was without foundation. This is the Surrey Police statement in full:
“This is an update in relation to a report of a rape in Epsom which we received in the early hours on Saturday, 11 April.
A thorough investigation, including an extensive examination of CCTV footage of the woman’s movements, house to house enquiries, interviewing witnesses and forensic tests, has been carried out. Through this examination of all evidence, we can conclude that no sexual offence occurred on this occasion, and we are closing the investigation.
What has become clear is that a woman in her 20s during a night out in Epsom, sustained an accidental head injury prior to making a confused report.
The woman involved has given us permission to share this information with you and she continues to be supported by relevant services.
To be clear, we take every report of sexual offending seriously, and any such report is treated with sensitivity. To do this, it is imperative that the appropriate time is allowed to complete a thorough investigation and support is given to the complainant to progress enquiries at their own pace. This limits what information we are able to release publicly.
At the early stages of this investigation, we issued an appeal for any witnesses or information that could help us progress our enquiries and identify any potential suspects. There was a lack of information in our initial appeal particularly regarding potential persons of interest. This was because the descriptions given were vague and limited. We recognise this caused concern amongst the community. We are now confident that there was no offence, and there were no suspects.
Our local officers will maintain a visible presence in Epsom over the coming days so please speak to them if you have any concerns or questions.”
Glyn Hall faces uncertain future as trustees issue urgent appeal to save Ewell landmark
5 May 2026
A historic community building at the heart of Ewell is at risk of being lost permanently unless urgent support can be secured.
Glyn Hall, situated on Cheam Road in Ewell Village, has served local residents for generations as a space for education, social gatherings and community activity. The hall traces its origins back to around 1870 and was later bequeathed for the benefit of Ewell residents by local benefactor Margaret Glyn in 1946.
However, after more than a century and a half of use, the building has now reached the end of its functional life. The ageing wooden structure has been closed, leaving the future of the site in doubt.
Volunteer trustees responsible for the charity have spent recent years working to secure the hall’s future. Plans have been developed to demolish the existing building and replace it with a modern facility better suited to contemporary community use. Planning permission for the redevelopment was granted in January 2024.
Fundraising efforts have already attracted strong local backing, with approximately £85,000 raised from community sources. Despite this, trustees say they have only reached around half of the funding required to deliver the project in full.
They now warn that, without additional financial support or new volunteers willing to take the project forward, the consequences could be stark. The land may have to be sold, the charity dissolved, and with it the long-standing legacy of Glyn Hall brought to an end.
Trustees are therefore issuing what they describe as a final appeal to residents, local organisations and potential benefactors to come forward.
“This is a final opportunity to save Glyn Hall for future generations,” they say.
Anyone interested in supporting the project or seeking further information is invited to contact trustee Matthew Anderson at mjranderson64@gmail.com.
The future of one of Ewell’s longstanding community assets now depends on whether sufficient backing can be secured in the coming months.
Surrey environmental group gets global recognition
5 May 2026
A Surrey-based grassroots campaign that reshaped national climate law has received one of the world’s most prestigious environmental honours, in a development that will resonate locally given the long-running controversy over oil drilling at Horse Hill.
Climate campaigner Sarah Finch, who led the legal challenge on behalf of the Weald Action Group, has been named one of six global winners of the Goldman Environmental Prize for 2026. The annual award recognises grassroots activists from each continent who have made significant contributions to environmental protection.
The recognition follows Finch’s landmark victory in the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom in June 2024, in a case brought against Surrey County Council over oil drilling at Horse Hill. As previously reported by Epsom and Ewell Times, the case became a focal point for national debate on fossil fuel extraction and planning law.
The court’s ruling—now widely referred to as the “Finch judgment”—established that planning authorities must take into account the downstream climate impact of burning extracted fossil fuels when considering applications. This marked a significant shift in legal interpretation, extending environmental assessment beyond the immediate site of extraction.
Campaigners say the implications have already been far-reaching. The judgment has influenced decisions affecting fossil fuel projects across the UK, including developments in Cumbria and the North Sea, and has been cited in wider planning and legal contexts such as aviation and intensive farming. Courts in other jurisdictions, including Norway, Guyana and Australia, have also drawn on similar reasoning.
Finch said she was “honoured” to accept the award on behalf of the Weald Action Group and communities campaigning against fossil fuel expansion. She described the ruling as evidence that “ordinary people organising together can win big victories,” adding that the scientific consensus leaves “no room for any more extraction and burning of coal, oil or gas” if climate targets are to be met.
The legal challenge was supported by Friends of the Earth, whose senior lawyer Katie de Kauwe described the ruling as “one of the most significant legal breakthroughs this century” in addressing the climate crisis. She said it had “fundamentally changed the rule book” by requiring developers to account for the full climate consequences of their projects.
Local campaigners involved in the Horse Hill dispute also welcomed the recognition. Lorraine Inglis of the Weald Action Group said the award reflected years of sustained community effort in Surrey and highlighted the role of grassroots activism in shaping national policy.
The Goldman Environmental Prize, established in 1989, has honoured 239 winners from 98 countries. This year’s cohort is notable as the first made up entirely of women, with other winners including climate activists from Colombia and South Korea who have led successful campaigns against fracking and for legally binding emissions targets.
For Surrey residents, the award brings renewed attention to a campaign that has already left a lasting imprint on the local landscape and on national law. As Epsom and Ewell Times has previously reported, the Horse Hill case demonstrated how a dispute rooted in a single planning decision can evolve into a defining legal precedent with international consequences.
Surrey Police update on alleged sexual assault in Epsom
5 May 2026
Surrey Police have issued a further update following last weekend’s reported incident in Epsom, stating that officers have not found evidence to support the offence as initially described, while confirming that enquiries remain ongoing.
In a statement published on the Surrey Police website, Assistant Chief Constable for Local Policing Sarah Grahame said:
“Over the past week, there has been widespread speculation and commentary regarding this report. We are aware of the strength of feeling this has created, and of the frustration caused by our limited public comment on the matter.
During this time, we have been investigating in depth to establish the sequence of events and to clarify the circumstances surrounding the reported incident. We have reviewed an extensive amount of CCTV footage from the area. We have also been interviewing potential witnesses, carrying out forensics investigations and conducting house-to-house enquiries.
To date, we have not found any evidence of the offence as reported but the investigation is ongoing.
There has been much speculation about the non-release of a description of any suspects, especially regarding the ethnicity. No descriptions have been released as the information about the incident and potential suspects is so limited. To address the specific commentary, there is no evidence that asylum seekers or immigrants were involved.
If you have any information or any CCTV, dashcam, or helmet camera footage, please contact us online, or via 101 quoting PR/45260041426.
We appreciate that you want information. We will continue to tell you as much as we can, to engage with you, to reassure you and to address concerns. We ask for space and time to work through the investigation.
There will be an increased police presence in Epsom over the weekend.” (Surrey Police)
The update follows a week of heightened concern in the town and significant public reaction. National media have also reported the same position from Surrey Police, including the finding that there is currently no evidence of the offence as reported, alongside confirmation that the investigation continues. (The Times)
Police are continuing to appeal for information from anyone who may have been in the area or who holds relevant footage.
Police have launched a major investigation following reports that a young woman was raped by multiple men in Epsom in the early hours of Saturday morning.
The incident is said to have taken place near Epsom Methodist Church on Ashley Road, close to the town centre, between approximately 2am and 4am. The woman, believed to be in her twenties, had reportedly left a nearby nightclub shortly before the attack and is understood to have been followed.
Surrey Police confirmed that the assault involved several suspects and that enquiries are ongoing to establish their identities. At this stage, no full descriptions have been released, and officers are appealing for information from the public.
A senior investigating officer described the incident as extremely distressing and confirmed that the victim is being supported by specially trained officers. Detectives are carrying out extensive enquiries in the area, including reviewing CCTV footage and conducting house-to-house inquiries.
Police are urging anyone who was in the Ashley Road area during the early hours of Saturday morning, or who may have seen anything suspicious, to come forward. Drivers with dashcam footage are also asked to check recordings that may assist the inquiry.
Anyone with information is asked to contact Surrey Police quoting reference PR/45260041426, either via the force’s online reporting form or by contacting them directly. Information can also be provided anonymously via Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111 or through its website.
Support services are available for anyone affected by sexual violence, including Rape Crisis England & Wales, which operates a 24-hour helpline on 0808 500 2222.
The seriousness of the allegation, coupled with its location close to the centre of Epsom, has led to heightened concern locally and significant national media attention. Officers have maintained a visible presence in the area while investigations continue.
Cllr Dalton seeks another layer of local government
5 May 2026
Epsom & Ewell Borough Council has apparently joined Surrey leaders in backing a bid to Government for a new county-wide “Foundation Strategic Authority” (FSA), prompting questions about how such a significant step has been taken locally.
A letter dated 20 March 2026, signed by council leaders across Surrey including Epsom & Ewell’s leader Cllr Hannah Dalton, (RA Stoneleigh) confirms an Expression of Interest to form the authority by April 2027 .
The proposal forms part of the Government’s latest devolution programme, under which areas without existing mayoral structures are invited to establish FSAs to coordinate transport, housing, infrastructure, skills and economic development.
What is being proposed?
An FSA would sit above the new unitary councils planned for Surrey in 2027, providing strategic oversight across the county. The submission to Government describes it as offering “unified strategic leadership” and supporting long-term planning across a coherent economic area .
FSAs are also widely seen as a potential stepping stone to deeper devolution, including the possibility of a future elected mayor.
A changing local government landscape
The proposal comes as Surrey undergoes major reorganisation, with existing borough and district councils — including Epsom & Ewell — due to be replaced by two unitary authorities.
Alongside that, some areas are exploring the creation of parish or community councils.
The combined effect could see a structure emerging of:
unitary councils delivering local services,
a county-wide strategic authority shaping major policy,
and more localised parish-level bodies in some areas.
Local concerns over authority and process
In a letter to the Epsom and Ewell Times, CllrAlex Coley (Independent) raises concerns about how the decision to support the Expression of Interest was taken .
He questions whether the Leader of the Council had authority to sign on behalf of Epsom & Ewell Borough Council, or whether the action was taken without formal approval through committee or full Council.
That distinction is not merely procedural. If the Expression of Interest was submitted on behalf of the Council, it would ordinarily be expected to rest on some identifiable constitutional or delegated authority. If not, it raises a different question as to the capacity in which the letter was signed.
Council leader declines comment
The Epsom and Ewell Times invited Cllr Hannah Dalton to clarify the position. She responded: “As we are in the pre-election period it is my understanding that elected members should not be making any comments on council matters and so I will not be providing a comment.”
Cllr Dalton is closely associated with the failed attempt to create parish councils for Epsom and Ewell.
Are pre-election publicity rules engaged?
The pre-election period places restrictions on local authority publicity, under the Code issued pursuant to the Local Government Act 1986.
However, those provisions are directed at preventing the authority itself from using public resources to publish material that could influence an election. They do not impose a general prohibition on elected members explaining decisions or clarifying the basis on which actions have been taken.
More importantly in this context, the issue raised is whether the Expression of Interest was in fact an authorised act of the Council at all.
If it was, the question of authority is plainly a legitimate matter for public explanation. If it was not, it is difficult to see how statutory restrictions on “local authority publicity” could apply to a request for clarification of an individual member’s actions.
Either way, the question goes to accountability, not publicity.
What happens next?
The Government will now consider Surrey’s Expression of Interest. If progressed, further detail will be required on governance, powers and accountability.
For residents, the immediate issue may be more straightforward: understanding how decisions of this scale are made locally, and on whose authority they are taken.
