First reported 16 Mar 2015•Latest report 18 Jul 2025
Definition
What this concern includes
Includes failures of roadside vehicle-restraint barriers and associated containment or redirection controls on public roads, including gaps, absent barriers, damaged or unreplaced barriers, and barrier designs that do not safely contain or redirect vehicles leaving the carriageway.
Not included
Excludes pedestrian, bridge-edge, riverside and other barriers whose primary purpose is to protect people from falls rather than to contain or redirect vehicles.
Excludes generic road-layout, lighting, signage, drainage, maintenance or speed-control deficiencies where roadside vehicle restraint is not the identified unsafe control.
Excludes vehicle restraint or barrier failures in non-road settings unless the assertion explicitly concerns the same roadside vehicle-containment function.
Excludes barriers intended only to prevent unauthorised access where no vehicle-containment or road-user protection function is identified.
Reports
10
Distinct published reports
Individual concerns
10
A report can raise multiple concerns
Date range
2015–2025
First to latest report issue date
Stated actions
17
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.
Department for Transport2
National Highways2
Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council1
Cambridgeshire County Council1
Clough Williams-Ellis Foundation1
Devon Highways1
Gwynedd Council1
Lincolnshire County Council1
Stockport Borough Council1
Welsh Government1
West Sussex County Council1
English county council3
Ministerial department2
National road infrastructure body2
Devolved government1
English metropolitan district council1
English unitary authority1
Registered charity1
Sub-organisation1
Welsh county council1
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.
Hertfordshire
Concerns raised1
Gap in the safety barrier on the M1 southbound
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 respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.2
Action
Clear trees within 5 metres of the carriageway edge along this section of the M1.
Stated by National HighwaysStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 23 July 2025.
Action
Undertake the Road Restraint Risk Assessment Process to assess the need for vehicle restraint systems or other mitigations at this location.
Stated by National HighwaysStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 23 July 2025.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.2
Position
The 260-metre barrier gap need not be closed because current CD 377 requirements apply only to gaps shorter than 100 metres.
Stated by National HighwaysExisting arrangements considered sufficientThe respondent said that existing arrangements were sufficient, so no further action was needed.
Position
Existing tree clearance and network safety monitoring are relied upon instead of upgrading vehicle restraint systems as a matter of course.
Stated by National HighwaysExisting arrangements considered sufficientThe respondent said that existing arrangements were sufficient, so no further action was needed.
West Sussex, Brighton and Hove
Concerns raised1
Failure to prevent vehicles from entering the canal at the end of the road
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 respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
Action
Install reflective bollards along the canal bank to provide a clearer visual indication of the road end.
Stated by West Sussex County CouncilStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 19 May 2025.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
Position
Existing kerb height provides sufficient physical and audible warning; raising it is not considered necessary and would cause visual intrusion.
Stated by West Sussex County CouncilExisting arrangements considered sufficientThe respondent said that existing arrangements were sufficient, so no further action was needed.
North West Wales
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 concerns
Each 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 CouncilStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 17 October 2024.
Action
Review future options for installing a road restraint system as maintenance or wider highway improvements affect the relevant considerations.
Stated by Gwynedd CouncilStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 17 October 2024.
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 CouncilExisting arrangements considered sufficientThe respondent said that existing arrangements were sufficient, so no further action was needed.
Position
Road restraint installation is limited by substantial funding, resource, physical, engineering, legal, environmental, land ownership and maintenance constraints.
Stated by Gwynedd CouncilUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.
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 FoundationDisputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.
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 FoundationRedirects responsibilityThe respondent said that another organisation was responsible for deciding or taking action.
Cambridgeshire and Peterborough
Concerns raised1
Unavailability of a final vehicle-exclusion solution at the waterway
This report raised 6 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
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 respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.2
Action
Conduct a traffic flow survey to inform proposed closure or restricted access for Puddock Road.
Stated by Cambridgeshire County CouncilStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 1 August 2024.
Action
Undertake informal engagement and submit a Traffic Regulation Order application for closure or restricted access to Puddock Road, subject to statutory consultation.
Stated by Cambridgeshire County CouncilStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 1 August 2024.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.2
Position
A vehicle restraint system was not suitable because unstable ground conditions might cause the barrier to collapse after impact.
Stated by Cambridgeshire County CouncilUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.
Position
A rafting barrier was not pursued because its installation and maintenance costs and complexity were prohibitively high, without guaranteed long-term structural rigidity.
Stated by Cambridgeshire County CouncilUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.
County of Dorset
Concerns raised1
Lack of a barrier between the highway and the storm drain
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 respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
Action
Install permanent timber post-and-rail fencing beside the slip road and storm drain.
Stated by Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole CouncilStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 24 May 2021.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
Position
Additional fencing is not appropriate because recurrence risk is low and the fencing could cause more injuries than it prevents.
Stated by Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole CouncilDisputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.
Swansea and Neath Port Talbot
Concerns raised1
Failure of the barrier to safely redirect heavy vehicles along its length
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 respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.3
Action
Apply national barrier-containment standards consistently across the Strategic Road Network.
Stated by Welsh GovernmentStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 9 June 2019.
Action
Continue collaborating with National Highways on reviews of modern default barrier-containment levels, including data contribution and discussion.
Stated by Welsh GovernmentStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 9 June 2019.
Action
Continue monitoring incidents and review containment policy and practice when future data indicate emerging risks.
Stated by Welsh GovernmentStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 9 June 2019.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.4
Position
No site-specific factors justified higher containment, so the concern that N2 was inadequate is disputed.
Stated by Welsh GovernmentDisputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.
Position
Retaining N2 containment was considered appropriate because it complied with national standards and policy.
Stated by Welsh GovernmentExisting arrangements considered sufficientThe respondent said that existing arrangements were sufficient, so no further action was needed.
Position
A higher default containment level was not pursued because it would be disproportionately costly and require extensive network-wide reconstruction.
Stated by Welsh GovernmentUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.
Position
Changes to default containment policy are led nationally by National Highways, which is researching future policy.
Stated by Welsh GovernmentRedirects responsibilityThe respondent said that another organisation was responsible for deciding or taking action.
Exeter and Greater Devon
Concerns raised1
Insufficient nearside barrier length beside a carriageway drop-off
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 concerns
Each 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.1
Action
Undertake a Road Restraint Risk Assessment Process assessment near the existing vehicle restraint to determine barrier requirements against current standards.
Stated by National HighwaysStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 1 July 2018.
Nottinghamshire
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 concerns
Each 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 HighwaysStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 3 October 2017.
Action
Continue discussions with the landowner and agent to secure removal of the field access and closure of the barrier gap.
Stated by National HighwaysStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 3 October 2017.
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 HighwaysStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 3 October 2017.
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 HighwaysUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.
Manchester South
Concerns raised1
Absence of a protective barrier on the central reservation
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 concerns
Each 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
Submit a proposed Crookilley Way central barrier scheme for consideration among possible improvements to the key route network.
Stated by Stockport Borough CouncilStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 3 March 2016.
Action
Make a funding bid for installing a central barrier on Crookilley Way during 2016/2017.
Stated by Stockport Borough CouncilStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 3 March 2016.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.2
Position
TfGM must support any central-barrier installation because Crookilley Way forms part of the key route network.
Stated by Stockport Borough CouncilRedirects responsibilityThe respondent said that another organisation was responsible for deciding or taking action.
Position
Installation of a central barrier cannot proceed without external funding because road-safety improvement funds are limited and already committed.
Stated by Stockport Borough CouncilUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.
Central Lincolnshire
Concerns raised1
Failure to provide suitable roadside protection at the foot of the bank
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 concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.2
Position
Safety barriers cannot be erected without significant structural works because the embankment lacks sufficient strength.
Stated by Lincolnshire County CouncilUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.
Position
Providing safety barriers would be excessively costly and divert limited resources from repairing other county road defects.
Stated by Lincolnshire County CouncilUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.
Pin
Get email alerts
Request correction
Includes failures of roadside vehicle-restraint barriers and associated containment or redirection controls on public roads, including gaps, absent barriers, damaged or unreplaced barriers, and barrier designs that do not safely contain or redirect vehicles leaving the carriageway.
