Recurring concern
Inadequate vehicle restraint protection at hazardous edges
Pin
Get email alerts
Request correctionFirst reported 9 Jul 2014•Latest report 6 Jul 2026
What this concern includes
Includes failures of dedicated vehicle restraint or containment measures intended to prevent or materially reduce vehicle over-run or departure at hazardous road, driveway or carriageway edges, including inadequate barriers, retaining protection, containment assessment or inspection of changing roadside conditions.
Not included
- Excludes vehicle under-run protection devices fitted to lorries, which address collision intrusion beneath a vehicle rather than vehicles leaving a road or driveway.
- Excludes general road-surface, signage, lighting, traffic-management or driver-behaviour concerns unless the asserted unsafe condition is inadequate vehicle restraint at a hazardous edge.
- Excludes ordinary driveway, verge or roadside maintenance deficiencies where no vehicle over-run or vehicle-containment risk is identified.
- Excludes generic vehicle safety or crashworthiness concerns unrelated to preventing or reducing vehicle departure over a hazardous edge.
- Reports
- 4
- Individual concerns
- 4
- Date range
- 2014–2026
- Stated actions
- 7
Distinct published reports
A report can raise multiple concerns
First to latest report issue date
Described in published responses
Reports over time
Reports over time
Reports about this concern issued each year.
* 2026 is projected from reports observed to 7 Sep 2026.
Most frequent recipients
Most frequent recipients
Reports about this concern sent to each recipient.
Concerns and responses across reports
Only concerns grouped under this recurring concern are included. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.
-
Concerns raised1
Failure to provide effective protection against vehicle over-run at the driveway drop
This report raised 2 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.2
-
Action
Close the driveway to prevent vehicle over-run while safety measures are addressed.
Stated by Howarth Property Ltd -
Action
Install an engineered vehicle-stop barrier alongside the handrail to prevent vehicle over-run and reduce crush risk.
Stated by Howarth Property Ltd
-
Concerns raised1
Lack of roadside barrier or fence preventing vehicles entering the ditch
This report raised 3 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.2
-
Action
Complete a site-specific assessment of whether a road restraint system should be provided at the collision site.
Stated by Gwynedd Council -
Action
Review future options for installing a road restraint system as maintenance or wider highway improvements affect the relevant considerations.
Stated by Gwynedd Council
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.4
-
Position
Implemented signage and passive roadside measures may be sufficient to negate the need for a road restraint system.
Stated by Gwynedd Council
-
Position
Road restraint installation is limited by substantial funding, resource, physical, engineering, legal, environmental, land ownership and maintenance constraints.
Stated by Gwynedd Council -
Position
Stock fencing is not intended or designed as highway safety infrastructure and would not withstand a vehicle collision at speed.
Stated by the Trustees of the Ymddiriedolaeth Clough Williams-Ellis Foundation -
Position
Safety works on or adjacent to the public highway are the responsibility of the relevant authority, not the adjoining landowner.
Stated by the Trustees of the Ymddiriedolaeth Clough Williams-Ellis Foundation
-
Concerns raised1
Gap in the vehicle restraint barrier permitting unimpeded vehicle passage from the carriageway
This report raised 1 other concern. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.3
-
Action
Progress the drainage scheme, including ditch clearance, pipe repairs or replacement, cleaning, and additional drainage installation.
Stated by National Highways -
Action
Continue discussions with the landowner and agent to secure removal of the field access and closure of the barrier gap.
Stated by National Highways -
Action
Assess options for removing the field access and determine associated costs and a reasonable land-access value for an offer to the landowner.
Stated by National Highways
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
-
Position
Vehicle restraint barrier alterations cannot be implemented until agreement is reached with the landowner to close the field access.
Stated by National Highways
-
Concerns raised1
Lack of inspection of developing soft estate to assess vehicle restraint protection requirements
This report raised 1 other concern. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
No linked response statementsNo respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
Data last updated 7 September 2026