Recurring concern

Unsafe road design and layout

First to latest report 2 Dec 2013 — 2 Feb 2026

Reports that mention this concern
34
Times this concern has been raised
35
Stated actions linked to this concern
64

What this concern includes

Includes deficiencies in the design, geometry, layout or standards compliance of public roads where the road arrangement itself is identified as unsafe or as failing applicable design or regulatory requirements, including the A285 and comparable road-layout concerns.

What is not included
  • Excludes deficiencies limited to a specific dedicated road control, such as signage, markings, lighting, drainage, barriers, sight distance, road width or speed limits, where road design and layout is not the shared unsafe condition.
  • Excludes highway inspection, hazard reporting, maintenance or remedial-action process failures unless the road design or layout itself is identified as unsafe.
  • Excludes vehicle design, driver competence and non-road premises or transport hazards.
  • Excludes isolated collisions or road-user behaviour where no continuing unsafe road-design or layout condition is identified.

Reports and published responses 34 reports

See individual reports that have raised this concern, and the actions taken in response

  1. Berkshire

    AI-generated summary

    Edward McGivern · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Edward McGivern was cycling to work on Dover Road, Slough Trading Estate, on 9 November 2018 when his bicycle collided with a heavy goods vehicle turning left at a traffic-light-controlled junction. He sustained multiple injuries and died at the scene. The concern was that the road layout and cycle lanes may place cyclists at continuing risk of being struck by motor vehicles turning left at junctions.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure of Dover Road layout to safely separate cyclists from motor vehicles

    Wider context from the report

    “I am concerned that there have now been two collisions between bicycles and motor vehicles at the junction of Dover Road and Buckingham Avenue caused by motor vehicles turning left at the traffic lights, and colliding with cyclists crossing the junction. There are many commercial vehicles using the roads around Slough Trading Estate, but also cyclists and pedestrians. The cycle lanes as they are marked on Dover Road may encourage cyclists to ride up the inside of vehicles waiting to turn left at the traffic lights, and they may not be seen by the drivers of those vehicles as they pull away from the lights and turn left, especially during the hours of darkness. The sharing of the carriageway of Dover Road between bicycles and motor vehicles by means of cycle lanes may put cyclists at risk. A review of the road layout of Dover Road, including the question of whether there should be dedicated marked cycle lanes, and if so, whether these should be positioned in the carriageway or on the pavement (so that the carriageway is reserved for motor vehicles and the pavement is shared between cyclists and pedestrians, with dedicated cycle paths) may produce a road system which is safer for cyclists. I consider that unless some action is taken there is a continuing risk of cyclists riding along Dover Road being struck by motorised vehicles turning left at junctions. ”

    Source location

    Edward McGivern · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 1 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Review all cycle lanes as part of the updated borough cycling strategy.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Council will undertake a review of all cycle lanes as part of the borough’s cycling strategy update. A comprehensive set of design standards for cycling, established on proven best practice, will be prepared. It is anticipated at this stage, that any resource prioritisation to cycle lane improvements will be assigned according to (a) locations where accidents have occurred and (b) where higher cycling levels exist and (c) to include a wider scheme of cycling improvements programmed to update cycle lanes and aligned to the regular cycle of maintenance, roadworks and improvement. The exact prioritisation criteria will be confirmed once the cycling strategy has been set out.”

    Source location

    Slough Borough Council Highways Department
    Page 2 · response
    Published 14 November 2019

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Prepare comprehensive cycling design standards based on proven best practice.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Council will undertake a review of all cycle lanes as part of the borough’s cycling strategy update. A comprehensive set of design standards for cycling, established on proven best practice, will be prepared. It is anticipated at this stage, that any resource prioritisation to cycle lane improvements will be assigned according to (a) locations where accidents have occurred and (b) where higher cycling levels exist and (c) to include a wider scheme of cycling improvements programmed to update cycle lanes and aligned to the regular cycle of maintenance, roadworks and improvement. The exact prioritisation criteria will be confirmed once the cycling strategy has been set out.”

    Source location

    Slough Borough Council Highways Department
    Page 2 · response
    Published 14 November 2019

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Continue working with SEGRO representatives to promote vehicle priority at nearside cycle lanes and discourage cyclists from undertaking at junctions.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Specifically in relation to the SEGRO estate, the Council will continue to work with representatives from the estate to promote the need for vehicles to give way to a nearside cycle lane and to reinforce the message that cyclists should not undertake at junctions at any”

    Source location

    Slough Borough Council Highways Department
    Page 2 · response
    Published 14 November 2019

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Two cycling incidents do not constitute a collision cluster or demonstrate a systemic junction problem warranting concern.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “1. There have been two collisions between bicycles and motor vehicles at the junction of Dover Road and Buckingham Avenue.”

    Source location

    Slough Borough Council Highways Department
    Page 1 · response
    Published 14 November 2019

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Segregating cyclists or reallocating road space is not feasible without disproportionate financial investment given the presenting problem and competing priorities.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “A review of the road layout of Dover Road, including the question of whether there should be dedicated marked cycle lanes, and if so, whether these should be positioned in the carriageway or on the pavement (so that the carriageway is reserved for motor vehicles and the pavement is shared between cyclists and pedestrians, with dedicated cycle paths) may produce a road system which is safer for cyclists.”

    Source location

    Slough Borough Council Highways Department
    Page 3 · response
    Published 14 November 2019

    Open published response

  2. Cheshire

    AI-generated summary

    Mr Costel Daniel Stancu · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Mr Costel Daniel Stancu died at Royal Stoke University Hospital on 3 April 2019, aged 37, after sustaining injuries in a series of road traffic collisions on the M6 on 29 March 2019. The concerns identified were that the lack of lighting on that section of motorway contributed to the collisions and created an ongoing risk to life, and that the associated risk had not been reassessed following the motorway’s conversion to a smart motorway or the incident.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Increased risks to motorway users from the smart motorway layout

    Wider context from the report

    “I determined that the lack of lighting on this section of the motorway was a contributory factor to the Second Series of Collisions; the evidence at inquest was that this section of the motorway remains unlit at night and I am concerned that this creates an ongoing risk to life. Whilst I found that none of the collisions were caused by the conversion of this section of the motorway to a ‘smart motorway’ I am concerned that this change in layout may have increased the risks posed to users of the motorway including the risk arising from the lack of lighting. The evidence that I heard during the inquest suggested that the risk arising from the lack of lighting had not been re-assessed either as part of the conversion to a ‘smart motorway’ or following the incident on 29ᵗʰ March 2019. ”

    Source location

    Mr Costel Daniel Stancu · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Complete the final Stage 4 Road Safety Audit for the M6 motorway junctions 16 to 19 scheme after its 12-month operational period.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Every scheme we install is required to undergo Road Safety Audits over time both before and after the installation of the scheme. The final Road Safety Audit (Stage 4) is conducted 12 months after the road is open to traffic. The audit focusses on collision monitoring where road traffic collisions (from STATS19 data) have been recorded in the vicinity of the highway scheme over the 12-month period after the scheme was operational. The audit for the M6 motorway junctions 16 to 19 scheme has not been completed to date because the scheme has not been open to traffic for 12 months. The final Road Safety Audit (Stage 4) is due to be carried out in the Summer of 2020.”

    Source location

    2019-0379-Response-by-Highways-England
    Page 4 · response
    Published 27 December 2019

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Existing smart motorway safety assessments, roadside technology and operational procedures are considered sufficient to maintain appropriate safety.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “(b) Introduction of smart motorways has been Government policy since 2008. The smart motorway package of measures is considered appropriate for Highways England’s network and gives flexibility to allow for increased demand from road users, whilst maintaining or improving the safety of our roads.”

    Source location

    2019-0379-Response-by-Highways-England
    Page 4 · response
    Published 27 December 2019

    Open published response

  3. Birmingham and Solihull

    AI-generated summary

    Dev Dilesh Naran · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Dev Dilesh Naran, aged 8, sustained an unsurvivable head injury as a rear-seat passenger when the Toyota Yaris in which he was travelling stopped in a live motorway lane and was struck from behind by a large goods vehicle. Concerns included the risks posed by stopped vehicles in live lanes, the lack of automatic alerts for lone stationary vehicles, and specific safety risks associated with the dynamic hard shoulder on this section of the M6.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Risk of driver confusion about the hard shoulder operating as a live lane

    Wider context from the report

    “3. When compared to motorways not operating a Dynamic Hard Shoulder running scheme there is a greater risk that vehicles will stop on the hard shoulder/lane 1 of the M6 in the vicinity of junctions 6 and 5 when the hard shoulder is a live lane and that there will be a greater danger when doing so because: a) there is a 2.5 mile gap in the emergency refuge areas at this point; b) this section of the M6 is elevated and as such there is no land along the edge of the motorway to which occupants of vehicles forced to stop on the hard shoulder can retreat; c) the carriageway to the nearside of the hard shoulder/lane 1 is only 0.4m wide before there is a low raised kerb with a paved area of 1.4m wide bordered by a 0.7m tall retaining wall at the edge of the flyover over which vehicles are restricted in their ability to pull fully out of the live lane; d) although the signage that the hard shoulder is in use as a live lane in this area accords with the Highway Code and the Managed Motorway Network Scheme there is a real risk that drivers seeing a hard shoulder bordered by solid white lines (and who may have used the road when the hard shoulder is not in use as a live lane) may become confused and forget/fail to register that the hard shoulder is operating as a live lane. ”

    Source location

    Dev Dilesh Naran · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Maintain additional frequent signage identifying whether the hard shoulder is operating as a live lane.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “When the hard shoulder is operating as a live lane, there are frequent signs stating, “Use hard shoulder” providing additional confirmation to drivers that the hard shoulder is operating as a live running lane, as was the case on the M6 Junction 6 to 5 southbound on 31 May 2018. We previously recognised the risk of drivers using the hard shoulder when it is not operating as a live lane and in 2015 introduced additional frequent signage to highlight to drivers the status of the hard shoulder at any given time.”

    Source location

    2019-0341-Response-by-Highways-England
    Page 4 · response
    Published 13 November 2019

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Frequent signage confirms when the hard shoulder operates as a live lane and mitigates driver confusion about its status.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “When the hard shoulder is operating as a live lane, there are frequent signs stating, “Use hard shoulder” providing additional confirmation to drivers that the hard shoulder is operating as a live running lane, as was the case on the M6 Junction 6 to 5 southbound on 31 May 2018. We previously recognised the risk of drivers using the hard shoulder when it is not operating as a live lane and in 2015 introduced additional frequent signage to highlight to drivers the status of the hard shoulder at any given time.”

    Source location

    2019-0341-Response-by-Highways-England
    Page 4 · response
    Published 13 November 2019

    Open published response

  4. Newcastle upon Tyne

    AI-generated summary

    Pauline Howell · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    On 5 February 2018, Pauline Howell was struck by a bus while crossing Newbridge Street West at the junction with John Dobson Street in Newcastle upon Tyne, sustaining injuries that resulted in her death. The principal concerns were the crossing’s proximity to the junction, its location on a busy bus route, the tight junction design, and the lack of margin for error, with a similar previous pedestrian death reported at the junction.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Junction and crossing design allowing no margin for pedestrian or driver error

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) The risk of pedestrian error at the John Dobson Street crossing is foreseeable. (2) The crossing is situated close to the junction. (3) The crossing is situated on a busy bus route. (4) The Junction is “tight” and challenging for public service vehicle drivers to negotiate. (5) The design/layout of the junction/crossing allow no margin for error by either or both pedestrian and driver. (6) The deaths of two pedestrians resulted from injuries sustained whilst crossing this junction in similar circumstances and the risk of future deaths continues. ”

    Source location

    Pauline Howell · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Commissioned and completed two independent Stage 4 road safety audits of the junction layout and signal phasing.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In order to give full consideration to the issues you raised, we commissioned two independent Stage 4 Road Safety Audits by different experienced Civil Engineers to review the current junction layout and signal phasing. Should you wish to see copies of the independent road safety audits we will make them available to you.”

    Source location

    2019-0498-Response-from-Newcastle-City-Council-Redacted-1
    Page 1 · response
    Published 9 August 2019

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Install “Look both ways” text on kerb edges at pedestrian crossing points.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Potential confusion over road layout as the segregated cycle lane could be mistaken as southbound carriageway – there had been an original suggestion to install text on the kerb edge at pedestrian crossing points to state ‘Look both ways’ which was discounted at the time as not permitted under the regulations. This is now permitted by the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions and will be installed.”

    Source location

    2019-0498-Response-from-Newcastle-City-Council-Redacted-1
    Page 2 · response
    Published 9 August 2019

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Revise light phasing, install detection sensors, relocate the primary traffic signal head, and raise pedestrian repeater signals.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Other minor scheme improvements will include:”

    Source location

    2019-0498-Response-from-Newcastle-City-Council-Redacted-1
    Page 2 · response
    Published 9 August 2019

    Open published response

  5. Lincolnshire

    AI-generated summary

    Matthew Bilby · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Matthew Bilby died after his motorcycle collided with a DAF Tipper Heavy Goods Vehicle at the A16/B1166 junction in Spalding, Lincolnshire, on 6 September 2018. He sustained extensive internal injuries and was pronounced dead at the scene. Concerns included evidence that the junction was dangerous and confusing, was an accident blackspot, had been the site of four fatalities, and posed an ongoing risk to road users.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Dangerous and confusing layout of the A16/B1166 junction

    Wider context from the report

    “1. The court heard evidence from a number of current regular road users describing the layout of the A16/B1166 junction as "dangerous", "horrendous", "confusing" and "difficult"; 2. In evidence the Lincolnshire Police confirmed that this was the fourth fatality at this junction; 3. The junction was created as a "staggered" junction in August 2010. Following one of the previous fatalities at the junction further work had been undertaken with red thermoplastic laid in hatched areas; 4. Expert evidence received from the East Midlands Operational Support Service Serious Collision Investigation Unit confirmed the junction to be an "accident blackspot" and that the staggered junction created an on-going risk to future road users in that: a. This junction should be reconfigured as a roundabout; b. Alternatively there should be the deployment of considered traffic calming measures (cameras, traffic lights, speed restrictions). ”

    Source location

    Matthew Bilby · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 1 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Continue monitoring funding opportunities for constructing the proposed roundabout.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “1. We would continue to monitor funding opportunities for the roundabout and”

    Source location

    2019-0112-Response-by-Lincolnshire-County-Council
    Page 1 · response
    Published 9 June 2019

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of available funding prevents delivery of the proposed roundabout and makes further road safety improvements difficult.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “I have noted the comments made by the Secretary of State, specifically that 'the responsibility for traffic management on local roads rests with the relevant local highway authority.' However, as set out in the Council's response dated 11 June 2019 to the Regulation 28 Report, there is currently no funding available for the Council to proceed with a project to construct a four-arm roundabout at this location.”

    Source location

    2019-0112-Response-by-Lincolnshire-County-Council
    Page 1 · response
    Published 9 June 2019

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Local highway authorities, not the Department, are responsible for deciding and implementing site-specific traffic management measures.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The responsibility for traffic management on local roads rests with the relevant local highway authority, as they are best placed to consider how to use traffic management measures so that local needs can be effectively met. My Department’s role is to provide the overarching strategy and policy context, as well as guidance to help them in managing their roads.”

    Source location

    2019-0112-Response-by-Department-for-Transport
    Page 1 · response
    Published 9 June 2019

    Open published response

  6. West Yorkshire (Western)

    AI-generated summary

    Robert Irwin Norton · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Robert Irwin Norton sustained fatal injuries in a motorcycle collision at a roundabout on 5 April 2018. The concerns identified were the poor legibility of road markings and potential confusion about the correct lane for exiting onto the M62 slip road.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Potential motorist confusion caused by road layout

    Wider context from the report

    “To review the existing road lay out in order to prevent potential confusion by motorists ”

    Source location

    Robert Irwin Norton · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Commission a study of similar accidents involving the roundabout and dual-entry exits.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “2. Overall layout of roundabout and dual entry exits”

    Source location

    Response from Calderdale Council
    Page 2 · response
    Published 1 November 2019

    Open published response

  7. North West Wales

    AI-generated summary

    Elijah Oluwagbenga Shotade · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    On 31 August 2018, Elijah Oluwagbenga Shotade died after his vehicle crossed into the eastbound carriageway on Britannia Bridge and collided with a heavy goods vehicle. The concerns identified were the road layout, which may leave westbound motorists unable to return to their nearside lane, and sat-nav directions telling motorists to bear right and encouraging entry into the eastbound lane.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Road layout preventing westbound motorists from returning to the nearside lane after overtaking

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) That the layout of the road is such that motorists driving in a west bound direction will remain the east bound lane after overtaking and are unable to return to their nearside lane. ”

    Source location

    Elijah Oluwagbenga Shotade · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 1 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Review traffic signing and road markings across Britannia Bridge to identify recommended safety improvements.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Notwithstanding the outcome of these investigations the Welsh Government decided to carry out a review of the traffic signing and road markings across the A55 Britannia Bridge and implement any recommended improvements as soon as possible in the 2017/18 financial year.”

    Source location

    2018-0290-Response-by-Department-for-Economy-and-ntrastructure
    Page 2 · response
    Published 18 January 2019

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Extend double white lines across Britannia Bridge and install lane arrows reinforcing the direction of travel.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The extension of the double white lines prohibiting overtaking over the whole length of Britannia Bridge and lane arrows to reinforce the direction of travel has now been completed. Improvements to the signing, which will affirm that vehicles should keep left, will follow before the end of the financial year.”

    Source location

    2018-0290-Response-by-Department-for-Economy-and-ntrastructure
    Page 2 · response
    Published 18 January 2019

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Improve signing to reinforce that vehicles should keep left.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The extension of the double white lines prohibiting overtaking over the whole length of Britannia Bridge and lane arrows to reinforce the direction of travel has now been completed. Improvements to the signing, which will affirm that vehicles should keep left, will follow before the end of the financial year.”

    Source location

    2018-0290-Response-by-Department-for-Economy-and-ntrastructure
    Page 2 · response
    Published 18 January 2019

    Open published response

  8. Nottinghamshire

    AI-generated summary

    Molly Jean Mills · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Molly Jean Mills, known as Jean, was involved in a collision with a lorry while turning right on the A6006 near Stanford on Soar on 6 June 2017. She died in hospital on 17 July 2017 after contracting bronchopneumonia associated with rib fractures sustained in the collision. The report identified concerns that the junction layout, incline, obstructed visibility, unclear manoeuvring arrangements and inadequate warnings increased the risk of future collisions and deaths.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Road layout requiring a sharp-angled right turn into Home Farm

    Wider context from the report

    “1. There is a significant incline on this road (in the direction the lorry was travelling). This makes the visibility issues referred to below much more significant. 2. If there are vehicles in the central carriageway waiting to turn right into both the DNRC and Home Farm, as here, there is a risk of them having an inadequate view of oncoming traffic on the A6006, before making their turning manoeuvres. 3. This is the case in both directions, but particularly for vehicles travelling in the direction towards Rempstone, because of the incline of the road. 4. The evidence of the lorry driver was that he did not see Jean’s car until she turned in front of his vehicle. 5. The evidence of the Forensic Collision Investigation Unit officer was that Jean’s view would have been largely or completely blocked by vehicles waiting to turn right into DNRC until 2.93 seconds before impact. 6. Witness evidence suggested that the right turn into DNRC is often backed up, resulting in queues in this central lane, making visibility worse. It was suggested this may be partly because of a security barrier in the DNRC grounds, which causes traffic to back up. This is likely to remain a busy junction when the DNRC opens. 7. If the oncoming vehicle (coming up the incline towards Rempstone) was a standard vehicle, rather than a lorry, visibility would be even worse, given that the cab of a lorry is higher up. 8. Similarly, if the vehicles waiting to turn right (into Home Farm and DNRC) were lorries or other large vehicles, such as ambulances, then visibility concerns would be heightened further. 9. There is an element of uncertainty at the junction – where both vehicles are turning right – there is no clear indication of who has right of way or how the vehicles should make their manoeuvres. 10. There is a solid double white line on the road just before the turning into Home Farm. This requires a driver turning right to make a sharp-angled turn. 11. The signs on either side of the junction warn oncoming traffic of the DNRC junction, but not the Home Farm junction. The fact that the Home Farm road is a private road should not reduce the need for adequate safety warnings to drivers. 12. I have been provided with a Nottinghamshire County Council Road Safety Audit regarding this junction, which is dated 21.9.15. This contains the following extract : During the site visit we were approached by a member of the public (apparently the owner) from Home Farm, opposite the Stanford Hall Access. He brought to our attention an issue which he felt had safety implications. Drivers intending to turn right into the Home Farm access have to wait on their side of the A6006 centre line to give way to oncoming traffic, as previously. They then have to turn across both the right turn lane and the Eastbound A6006 traffic lane. If a number of vehicles were occupying the right turn lane, he felt there would be potential to mask oncoming A6006 vehicles from view. Although the existing situation requires a right turner to wait in the westbound lane of the A6006, he also felt that he would be at greater risk of shunt type accidents than previously. 13. Sadly, this appears to have been the very risk that played a part in this collision. ”

    Source location

    Molly Jean Mills · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Assess permanent closure of the Home Farm access and consult affected parties.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “I can confirm that we are already considering a number of highway improvement measures at this location. The inclusion of this work in the 2018/19 Highways Programme was recently approved by the Council’s Communities and Place Committee. However there is some investigatory work to be carried out before we can finalise our proposals.”

    Source location

    2018-0051-Response-by-Nottingham-County-Council
    Page 1 · response
    Published 8 June 2018

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Permanent closure of the Home Farm access may not be possible without specific Secretary of State authorisation if objections are received.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Firstly we need to consider if the access to Home Farm can be closed on a permanent basis. We are obliged to explore this option as the most obvious and effective solution, since it would remove the opportunity for the right-turn manoeuvre that Jean attempted, and therefore almost guarantee that a similar collision would not occur in the future. This would require consultation with the various parties affected. Should we receive objections then this closure may not prove possible without specific authorisation from the Secretary of State.”

    Source location

    2018-0051-Response-by-Nottingham-County-Council
    Page 1 · response
    Published 8 June 2018

    Open published response

  9. Milton Keynes

    AI-generated summary

    Ayse Yalcinkaya · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Ayse Yalcinkaya, aged 35, was the sole occupant of a stationary car at Junction 14 of the M1 when a lorry collided with it, and she died from multiple injuries. Concerns included unclear signage and uncertainty about lane use on the slip road, as well as whether a run-off lane should be provided before the junction.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of a run-off lane prior to the junction at Junction 14 of the M1

    Wider context from the report

    “(2) I was also informed that on the most recently build slip roads on other motorways there is now provision for a run off lane to be provided prior to the junction. Perhaps a similar lane could be provided at junction 14 of the M1? ”

    Source location

    Ayse Yalcinkaya · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 1 · concerns

    Open source report

  10. Dorset

    AI-generated summary

    Reverend Colin Hodge · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    On 19 January 2016, Reverend Colin Hodge stumbled on an uneven pavement at a junction in Wareham and fell against a turning vehicle, then struck his head. He was taken to hospital and died on 25 January from an inoperable head injury. Concerns included the poor state of repair and lack of a clear boundary between the pavement and roadway, with vehicles sometimes cutting the corner.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Narrow entrance to Howards Lane causing cars to cut the corner

    Wider context from the report

    “(2) At the time of the incident, the pavement and roadway were all of one level. (3) Evidence from the witnesses indicated that this junction was of concern for two reasons; Firstly that pedestrians would walk straight across as there was no clear boundary between the pavement and the road; Secondly, as the entrance to Howards Lane is narrow, cars would sometimes cut the corner. ”

    Source location

    Reverend Colin Hodge · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 1 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Erect a marker post in the footway to prevent vehicles from overrunning it when turning into Howard’s Lane.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Concerns regarding vehicles overrunning the footway whilst making a left turn into Howard’s Lane from North Street have not previously been raised with us. In recognition of these concerns a marker post (bollard) will be erected in the footway to prevent vehicles from overrunning the footway at Howard’s Lane.”

    Source location

    2017-0042-Response-by-Dorset-County-Council
    Page 1 · response
    Published 5 March 2017

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    The fatal site investigation found no highway-related factors contributed to the fatality.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The fatal site investigation was completed by colleagues at Dorset Police and Highway Officers on 23 May 2016. This investigation did not reveal any highway related factors that contributed to the fatality.”

    Source location

    2017-0042-Response-by-Dorset-County-Council
    Page 1 · response
    Published 5 March 2017

    Open published response

Actions and positions describe what organisations say in published responses. Implementation is not independently verified.

Back to top

Data last updated 7 September 2026