Recurring concern

Inadequate road warning signage

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

First reported 2 Dec 2013•Latest report 1 Jun 2026

Definition

What this concern includes

Includes deficiencies in warning, hazard, navigation or speed-limit signage specifically intended to protect road users on roads, bends, bridges, junctions, roundabouts or comparable road approaches, including failures of prominence, placement, direction or provision.

Not included

  • Excludes non-road warnings, including railway, product, food-allergen, clinical and social-care policy communications.
  • Excludes road markings, street lighting, vegetation maintenance, speed-limit setting and physical road layout unless the assertion specifically concerns dedicated road warning signage.
  • Excludes general road safety deficiencies or collision hazards that do not identify inadequate warning signage.
Reports
84

Distinct published reports

Individual concerns
100

A report can raise multiple concerns

Date range
2013–2026

First to latest report issue date

Stated actions
118

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.

National Highways19
Department for Transport9
Cumbria County Council4
Warwickshire County Council4
Bradford City Council3
Hampshire County Council3
Lincolnshire County Council3
Office of the Chief Coroner3
Recipient name withheld3
West Sussex County Council3
Devon County Council2
Dorset County Council2
Durham County Council2
Kent County Council2
Monmouthshire County Council2

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.

  1. Newcastle and North Tyneside

    AI-generated summary

    Jean HARDY · 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

    Jean Hardy, aged 71, crossed the B1286 Doxford Parkway at night at a point without a designated pedestrian crossing and was struck by a motor vehicle. She sustained multiple injuries and died in hospital on 8 February 2020. Concerns included common local crossing at non-designated points, lack of fencing and warning signage, and a risk of further deaths requiring a comprehensive review of pedestrian crossing provision.

    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 to provide signage prohibiting non-designated crossing or warning of crossing risks

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) The B1286 Doxford Parkway is bordered by Multiple housing estates and the evidence confirmed that local practice of crossing at non designated crossing points which are more easily accessible and convenient is common and well known. (2) Access to the carriageway is not restricted by fencing (save for limited fencing at designated crossing points) and there is no signage prohibiting crossing at non designated crossing points or warning of the risks to the public of doing so. (3) There is a risk of further deaths occurring in this location and in similar circumstances. To prevent future deaths there should be a comprehensive review of current pedestrian crossing provision on B1286 Doxford Parkway. ”

    Source location

    Jean HARDY · 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 a road safety review of the location and assess the suitability of existing pedestrian crossing points.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In response to your concerns and request for action, the Council has undertaken a road safety review of the location concerned; and has also investigated the suitability of the existing pedestrian crossing point locations on Doxford Park Way. The issues you have raised around provision of fencing within a central grassed reservation and signing has been considered. This was discussed on site, and the view of the Police is that this would encourage barrier hopping by more agile pedestrians and would not be supported by them.”

    Source location

    Response from Sunderland City Council
    Page 2 · response
    Published 2 June 2023

    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 signs on both sides of Doxford Parkway directing pedestrians to nearby crossing points.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “As an action, the Council are proposing to install signing on both sides of Doxford Parkway to direct pedestrians to nearby crossing points.”

    Source location

    Response from Sunderland City Council
    Page 2 · response
    Published 2 June 2023

    Open published response

  2. Cambridgeshire and Peterborough

    AI-generated summary

    Milan Peter HAMZA (Otherwise known as Milan Peter RADOCZ) · 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

    Milan Peter Hamza, also known as Milan Peter Radocz, was an 8-year-old front-seat passenger in a vehicle that left the road, entered a pond and became submerged on 3 September 2022. He was unable to escape and died from drowning. The principal concern was the lack of signage warning westbound drivers about the sharp bend, despite the water hazard beyond it.

    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 signage alerting westbound traffic to the sharp left hand bend

    Wider context from the report

    “The vehicle involved in the collision failed to negotiate the left hand bend on the westbound Old Oundle Road at Wittering adjacent to the rear crash gates of RAF Wittering. The vehicle left the road to its offside and entered a pond where it became submerged in water. The 2 occupants of the vehicle drowned as a result. There is sharp route deviation signage for vehicles travelling in the opposite direction but nothing to alert westbound drivers of the sharp left hand bend. The water beyond the bend clearly creates an additional hazard. Whilst the precise reason the vehicle failed to negotiate the left hand bend on this occasion is unclear I am concerned that the lack of signage alerting westbound traffic of the bend at this location creates a risk of future incidents and death, not least because of the water beyond. ”

    Source location

    Milan Peter HAMZA (Otherwise known as Milan Peter RADOCZ) · 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

    Undertake a signing review of Old Oundle Road following the incident.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Following the report into the incident on Old Oundle Road, Wittering by the Police in 2022 our Highways team undertook a signing review of the road.”

    Source location

    Response from Peterborough City Council
    Page 1 · response
    Published 5 May 2023

    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

    Implement identified signing changes on Old Oundle Road, including installing a chevron sign warning road users of the deviation.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “I note your concern and following our review can confirm that there were changes to the signing along Old Oundle road identified. One of these changes included the installation of a chevron sign to warn road users of the deviation. These works were undertaken week commencing 9th January 2023.”

    Source location

    Response from Peterborough City Council
    Page 1 · response
    Published 5 May 2023

    Open published response

  3. Cambridgeshire and Peterborough

    AI-generated summary

    Vivien RADÓCZ · 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

    Vivien RADÓCZ died after the vehicle she was driving left the road, entered a pond, and became submerged; she was unable to escape and her death was confirmed at the scene. The report raised concern that there was no signage warning westbound drivers of the sharp bend, despite the additional hazard posed by the water beyond it, creating a risk of future incidents 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

    Lack of signage alerting westbound traffic to the sharp left hand bend

    Wider context from the report

    “There is sharp route deviation signage for vehicles travelling in the opposite direction but nothing to alert westbound drivers of the sharp left hand bend. The water beyond the bend clearly creates an additional hazard. Whilst the precise reason the vehicle failed to negotiate the left hand bend on this occasion is unclear I am concerned that the lack of signage alerting westbound traffic of the bend at this location creates a risk of future incidents and death, not least because of the water beyond. ”

    Source location

    Vivien RADÓCZ · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 1 · concerns

    Open source report

  4. Gwent

    AI-generated summary

    Andrew Mark STILL · 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

    Andrew Mark Still died at the scene after his motorcycle collided with a VW campervan on the A466 near Tintern on 3 June 2022. The concerns included an overgrown chevron sign, missing chevron markers and a lack of evidence that remedial action had been taken after the relevant authority was alerted.

    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 to maintain visible chevron signage at bends

    Wider context from the report

    “There was a warning sign which alerted motorists to the forthcoming series of bends and the extended white road marking indicated a pending hazard. There was also a chevron marker closer to the bend. At the inquest I found that Andrew had overtaken vehicles prior to the bends and would have seen the warning sign and the road markings. However, I found that the chevron sign near to the bend was overgrown. Moreover there was evidence that there had previously been 3 markers but two had been removed and not replaced. I was informed that the relevant authority had been made aware of this problem by Gwent Police after Andrew’s death but there was no evidence at the inquest that any remedial action had been taken ”

    Source location

    Andrew Mark STILL · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    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 to take remedial action on a reported road-signage problem

    Wider context from the report

    “There was a warning sign which alerted motorists to the forthcoming series of bends and the extended white road marking indicated a pending hazard. There was also a chevron marker closer to the bend. At the inquest I found that Andrew had overtaken vehicles prior to the bends and would have seen the warning sign and the road markings. However, I found that the chevron sign near to the bend was overgrown. Moreover there was evidence that there had previously been 3 markers but two had been removed and not replaced. I was informed that the relevant authority had been made aware of this problem by Gwent Police after Andrew’s death but there was no evidence at the inquest that any remedial action had been taken ”

    Source location

    Andrew Mark STILL · 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

    Replace the chevron signs to improve visibility for motorists.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    ““Confirm that plans are in place for the chevron markers to be replaced and foliage removed from the remaining chevron marker to ensure it is visible to motorists.””

    Source location

    Response from Monmouthshire County Council
    Page 1 · response
    Published 27 February 2023

    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

    Remove foliage obstructing the remaining chevron marker.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    ““Confirm that plans are in place for the chevron markers to be replaced and foliage removed from the remaining chevron marker to ensure it is visible to motorists.””

    Source location

    Response from Monmouthshire County Council
    Page 1 · response
    Published 27 February 2023

    Open published response

  5. Suffolk

    AI-generated summary

    Stephen John COOMBES · 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

    Stephen ‘John’ Coombes died at Addenbrookes Hospital on 3 September 2021 after a single-vehicle collision in which the Porsche he was driving left the road and overturned. The report identifies concern that inadequate signage failed to communicate a temporary 30 mph speed limit, leaving road users unaware of the reduced limit and potentially resulting in further fatalities if similar road defects occur.

    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

    Inadequate provision of temporary reduced-speed signage

    Wider context from the report

    “The court heard that the depression was known to be present by the Highways Authority, and a temporary 30 mph speed limit (instead of the usual 50mph) had been put in place. Evidence was heard from the Forensic Crash Investigation Officer from Suffolk Constabulary, who conducted an investigation into the road traffic collision which caused John’s death. This officer told the court, how he and a colleague drove a police vehicle over the depression in the road at various speeds to observe the reaction the vehicle had to damaged road surface. At 30 mph the police vehicle negotiated the depression in the road with relative ease. At 50 mph, the police vehicle reacted significantly when negotiating the depression. At the time of Johns collision, he had just overtaken another vehicle and therefore crossed the depression a slight angle as he returned to his own side of the carriage way. When the police officers replicated this vehicle movement at 50 mph, the police vehicle reacted violently, with one of the wheels leaving the surface of the road. The officer driving that vehicle was not prepared to attempt the same manoeuvre at any higher speed due to the risk involved. The police officer then told the court that the attending officers themselves were unaware of 30 mph speed limit on this stretch of road. The officer told the court that the main 50 mph signs, the smaller repeater 50 mph signs and the 50 mph roundels painted on the road surface were all clearly visible on this stretch of road. Prior to the depression the officer saw one temporary 30mph partially obscured in the verge, but assumed it was left over from previous works, as all of the 50mph signs remained in view. Evidence was heard that in the normal course of events, when a temporary reduction in a speed limit is imposed on a stretch of road, any signage indicating a higher speed limit should be covered by either securing a dark bag or sack over each sign, or spray painting it out. On the basis of the police officers’ evidence, that clearly did not occur in this case, and this, coupled to there being only one 30mph temporary sign in place prior to the depression in the road, left road users (and attending police officers) unaware of the reduced speed limit in place. I am therefore concerned that should further identified road defects require a reduction in the speed limit, that any repeat of the provision of inadequate signage and/or a failure obscure higher speed limits may result in further fatalities. ”

    Source location

    Stephen John COOMBES · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    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 to obscure higher speed-limit signage when imposing temporary reductions

    Wider context from the report

    “The court heard that the depression was known to be present by the Highways Authority, and a temporary 30 mph speed limit (instead of the usual 50mph) had been put in place. Evidence was heard from the Forensic Crash Investigation Officer from Suffolk Constabulary, who conducted an investigation into the road traffic collision which caused John’s death. This officer told the court, how he and a colleague drove a police vehicle over the depression in the road at various speeds to observe the reaction the vehicle had to damaged road surface. At 30 mph the police vehicle negotiated the depression in the road with relative ease. At 50 mph, the police vehicle reacted significantly when negotiating the depression. At the time of Johns collision, he had just overtaken another vehicle and therefore crossed the depression a slight angle as he returned to his own side of the carriage way. When the police officers replicated this vehicle movement at 50 mph, the police vehicle reacted violently, with one of the wheels leaving the surface of the road. The officer driving that vehicle was not prepared to attempt the same manoeuvre at any higher speed due to the risk involved. The police officer then told the court that the attending officers themselves were unaware of 30 mph speed limit on this stretch of road. The officer told the court that the main 50 mph signs, the smaller repeater 50 mph signs and the 50 mph roundels painted on the road surface were all clearly visible on this stretch of road. Prior to the depression the officer saw one temporary 30mph partially obscured in the verge, but assumed it was left over from previous works, as all of the 50mph signs remained in view. Evidence was heard that in the normal course of events, when a temporary reduction in a speed limit is imposed on a stretch of road, any signage indicating a higher speed limit should be covered by either securing a dark bag or sack over each sign, or spray painting it out. On the basis of the police officers’ evidence, that clearly did not occur in this case, and this, coupled to there being only one 30mph temporary sign in place prior to the depression in the road, left road users (and attending police officers) unaware of the reduced speed limit in place. I am therefore concerned that should further identified road defects require a reduction in the speed limit, that any repeat of the provision of inadequate signage and/or a failure obscure higher speed limits may result in further fatalities. ”

    Source location

    Stephen John COOMBES · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 3 · 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 a traffic management design standard requiring checks and maintenance after installation throughout each scheme.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Kier is committed to protecting road users and the workforce in relation to the installation of traffic management by or on behalf of Kier. To this end, Kier has in place a specific traffic management design standard setting out the necessary process, which includes the planning of traffic management checks and maintenance following installation on site the purpose of which is to maintain the safety and integrity of the traffic management measures for the duration of the scheme.”

    Source location

    Response from Kier Integrated Services
    Page 2 · response
    Published 28 September 2022

    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

    Review traffic management procedures and require opaque covering or removal of existing higher-speed signs and road-surface roundels when temporary speed limits are imposed.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Since the incident Kier has reviewed its procedures relating to checks and maintenance of traffic management measures at unattended sites in Suffolk. In the event that Kier receives an instruction from Suffolk County Council that includes the imposition of a temporary reduced speed limit the existing speed limit signs are fully covered with an opaque material. In the event that there are roundels displaying the existing speed limit on the road surface these will also be appropriately obscured and/or removed.”

    Source location

    Response from Kier Integrated Services
    Page 2 · response
    Published 28 September 2022

    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

    Undertake daily checks of temporary traffic management, including weekends and bank holidays, and install additional or replacement measures when issues are identified.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Checks of installed temporary traffic management measures, to include temporary speed limit signs, are undertaken on a daily basis, to include weekends and bank holidays, at all sites. In the event that an issue is identified with the traffic management measures on site requiring additional or replacement measures these are duly installed.”

    Source location

    Response from Kier Integrated Services
    Page 2 · response
    Published 28 September 2022

    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

    Update WMS and implement an enhanced, audited procedure for scheduling, allocating and completing traffic management checks and maintenance from installation.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “WMS has been updated to continue to ensure that traffic management checks are scheduled from the point of installation. This update of WMS has been underpinned by the implementation of an enhanced procedure, with an associated audit programme, to help ensure that traffic management checks and maintenance, to include signs showing temporary speed limits, are planned, scheduled, allocated and undertaken. All staff responsible for the planning, scheduling and allocation of traffic management works have been trained on and are working to this enhanced procedure. In addition, enhanced guidance has been developed for works gangs carrying out checks of traffic management measures on site, this includes the taking and recording of photographs to show that the measures remain in place.”

    Source location

    Response from Kier Integrated Services
    Page 2 · response
    Published 28 September 2022

    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

    Develop guidance for works gangs to check and photograph temporary traffic management measures and record that they remain in place.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “WMS has been updated to continue to ensure that traffic management checks are scheduled from the point of installation. This update of WMS has been underpinned by the implementation of an enhanced procedure, with an associated audit programme, to help ensure that traffic management checks and maintenance, to include signs showing temporary speed limits, are planned, scheduled, allocated and undertaken. All staff responsible for the planning, scheduling and allocation of traffic management works have been trained on and are working to this enhanced procedure. In addition, enhanced guidance has been developed for works gangs carrying out checks of traffic management measures on site, this includes the taking and recording of photographs to show that the measures remain in place.”

    Source location

    Response from Kier Integrated Services
    Page 2 · response
    Published 28 September 2022

    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

    Deliver toolbox talks to contract work gangs on undertaking traffic management checks.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In conjunction with this guidance, toolbox talks on undertaking traffic management checks have been delivered to the work gangs engaged by Kier on the contract with Suffolk County Council.”

    Source location

    Response from Kier Integrated Services
    Page 2 · response
    Published 28 September 2022

    Open published response

  6. Wiltshire and Swindon

    AI-generated summary

    Albert Thomas Stafford Manley · 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

    Albert Thomas Stafford Manley, known to his family as “Jim”, died at Southampton General Hospital on 31 May 2021 from multiple traumatic injuries sustained when his Ford Mondeo collided with an oncoming Land Rover Discovery on the B3081 near Tollard Royal. The report raises concern that the road layout, junction and bends could be misread by unfamiliar drivers, potentially contributing to collisions, and considers whether further warnings or other measures could reduce this risk.

    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 to maintain chevron signage at the Tollard Green bend

    Wider context from the report

    “Although I was unable to make a finding of fact in this case Jim more likely than not misunderstood the road lay out, I was satisfied that it was a possibility and I am concerned that a driver who is unfamiliar with that road section could read the road incorrectly taking into account what they physically see and having regard to the road signs approaching the junction, leading to such a misunderstanding. The national speed limit on this section of road is, of course, 60 mph and every driver have a duty to drive at a speed commensurate with road conditions and additionally owes a duty of care to other road users in terms of driving carefully and considerately. How is it possible to misread the road? In answering that question, see figure 1 below, is a photograph of the view using Google Earth cameras approaching the junction heading in the same south easterly direction that Jim would have been travelling. Fig.1 At approximately 200 metres from the junction is a very clear sign (above) highlighting the junction with the main B3081 continuing left to Tollard Royal and the road leading off to Tollard Green. In the photograph in the road ahead depending on the type of vehicle being driven and its position you can see a left-hand bend ahead of you. The visible bend is in fact a left hand bend once you have left the B3081 and is part of the road heading towards Tollard Green. It is not the junction bend on careful analysis. The next photograph at figure 2 shows a sign for tourist and information purposes which lies approximately 85 metres from the junction with Tollard Green. You can however see the bend ahead which again is the bend beyond the junction and is not the Tollard Green, Tollard Royal junction which is still hidden. Fig2 In Fig3 below a chevron sign at the time of the collision was missing on the sign post to the right of the highway but this sign together with the road markings have now been replaced/refreshed. As a driver myself the chevron markings would be of more assistance to a driver at night time although, of course, they would be visible in the day time but due to size to a lesser degree. At night, the reflective paint differentiating between black and white in my personal view would make the sign more obvious especially when headlights would be unlikely to pick up he Tollard Green bend ahead. Fig 3 In considering my duty to make a report to prevent future deaths I had a report prepared for ████████ from Wiltshire Police (copy attached) and in that report he documented a previous collision history in the last 5 years and in particular 2 incidents, 1 occurring in 2017 and the other in 2018, both of which involved vehicles turning right at the junction to Tollard Green. One incident involved a car and a motorcycle, the other involving a car and a van. I also heard evidence from ████████ who has lived in the area for a number of years that the route to via Tollard Green into Verwood and Bournemouth is used by many as a back road in respect of which he described it as “a rat run” and cars apparently do not necessarily slow to any great degree when exiting that junction from a south easterly direction. ████████ in his report makes 2 recommendations, one of which is to remove the hedgerow to the left to increase visibility around the bend. That recommendation, I have to say, is of some concern to me as I do not think that it would tempt drivers to slow down to any degree and they would be more likely in looking across to look for oncoming traffic and may not always pick up smaller vehicles such a cyclist and motorcycle users when looking to exit the junction heading towards Tollard Green. That recommendation is also of concern to me because Wiltshire at the end of the day is a rural county and its hedgerows and the wildlife contained within the hedgerows are an important feature of its character. I also heard evidence of one of our Coroners Officers, ████████, who commented that the hedgerows had an additional purpose in trying to prevent deer which are a feature in this particular area leaving the fields and crossing the roads. He acquired this information when he was a serving Police Officer and from speaking to one of the nearby landowners. Deer crossing road especially at night can pose a dangerous and unexpected hazard. As regards the second recommendation from ████████, this maybe something that you might be willing to consider or whether there perhaps is a better way through the use of further signing to make it even clearer as regards the existence of the junction and the bend. In asking you to consider painting the word “SLOW” as you approach the bend in both directions as recommended by ████████, I am mindful of the fact that as the highway authority you are under no obligation to provide such warnings as was pointed out by the House of Lords in the 2003 Decision in “Gorringe”. I am however concerned that there is a possibility that the road could be misread and that the bend having exited the junction heading towards Tollard Green could be mistaken by motorist unfamiliar with this section of the road, be confused with the bend and the junction on the B3081 heading towards Tollard Royal. The bend having exited the junction heading towards Tollard Green is very similar in shape to the bend heading towards Tollard Royal which is hidden until you get very close to it. I can see the propensity for a mistake being made here even if it is a mistake that I myself, I hope, would not make and I would ask you to consider if there is anything further that could be done to warn of this junction and bend to further minimise the possibility of any misunderstanding being made by road users if you are minded not to adopt ████████ recommendation. ”

    Source location

    Albert Thomas Stafford Manley · 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 the site and review existing traffic-sign arrangements through experienced road-safety professionals.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Following your suggestion that consideration be given to the introduction of further road markings and review of the current signing arrangements, I can advise the site has been visited by experienced road safety professionals with these comments in mind.”

    Source location

    Response from Wilshire Council
    Page 1 · response
    Published 16 September 2022

    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 road signs accurately represent the layout and hazards, so no further amendments are proposed.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Whilst the observations regarding the traffic signs are appreciated, the review has concluded that the existing sign arrangements are representative of the road layout and offer motorists the correct information of the hazards they should expect when negotiating this section of road. Therefore, no further amendments to the road signs are proposed.”

    Source location

    Response from Wilshire Council
    Page 1 · response
    Published 16 September 2022

    Open published response

  7. North Yorkshire and York including North Yorkshire Western District

    AI-generated summary

    Sasha Raven Marie Brown · 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

    Sasha Raven Marie Brown was the unaccompanied driver of a car that lost control on a very wet section of the A6068 and collided with an oncoming vehicle on 19 January 2021. The principal concerns were inadequate drainage and road design, the absence of flood-risk signage, and the reported ongoing high risk to motorists from surface water at that location.

    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 signage warning road users of flooding and loss-of-control risk

    Wider context from the report

    “It is acknowledged that officers of the Highway Authority were not called to give evidence at the Inquest Hearing nor was the Authority designated as an Interested Person for the purposes of disclosure and participation at the Hearing. There had been a written Report Collision ref 01-21 however from the Authority received at the Hearing relating to the roadway being the “A6068 Colne Road between Carr Head Lane and New Hall Farm near Cowling/Crosshills, Craven District” However the evidence revealed: a) The particular stretch of the A6068 was known to local, and other motorists familiar with it, as being frequently incapable of adequately and safely clearing surface storm and rainwater off the carriageway surface, thereby to make the road as reasonably safe as possible for the passage of motor vehicles, especially those travelling down the incline (as was the deceased). b) That water flowed and flows rapidly down the incline. It was (and is) not adequately regulated by drains and did not (and does not) get away. Instead water which came off (and comes off) adjacent land as well as the road itself accumulated (and accumulates) in volume. The want of appropriate cambers and slopes across the carriageway allowed (and allows) and indeed encouraged (and encourages) the water flow across the whole of the carriageway, rather than be conducted along drainage channels to the sides of the carriageway. c) The profile of the roadway meant (and means) that the water was (and is likely to be) thrown back (and forth) across the carriageway. The evidence showed a heavy water flow spread right across the carriageway into the deceased’s path from the deceased’s offside to nearside. That had been from an accumulation of water after there was a flow nearside to offside a short distance back from the incident scene. d) The process of simply cleaning out drains was not (and has not been) adequate to minimise the risk to road users. The evidence pointed to the need to make significant permanent road engineering alterations to the camber, layout, profile and slopes of the road surface and drains. The evidence indicated that the high levels of traversing water were not rare occurrences, creating what was found to be a ‘notoriety’. Climate change will increase the likelihood of adverse incidents such as was evidenced happening in the future, causing increased risk of death. The roadway here will remain a high risk, as it was for the deceased, for fatal accidents. e) There were (and are) no signs/signage indicating the risk of the road ‘flooding’, whether temporary or permanent at this location. Those familiar with it, including the Police expert, knew it for the past and present risk of loss of control. That should not mean the risk can be acceptable. f) The Authority must consider promptly permanent road engineering solutions and implement those appropriate to make this road as safe as reasonably possible. ”

    Source location

    Sasha Raven Marie Brown · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

  8. Cumbria

    AI-generated summary

    Stephen Cloudsdale · 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

    Stephen Cloudsdale died at the scene after his car collided with an LGV encroaching into the eastbound lane of the A66 in darkness and heavy rain. The concerns identified were the lack of lighting and warning signage, the speed of traffic, and whether the central reservation was wide enough to accommodate large vehicles safely.

    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 appropriately positioned warning signage for vehicles crossing from the café

    Wider context from the report

    “1) The lack of lighting near to or at the point of the A66 dual carriageway where the collision occurred which renders the presence of vehicles crossing the carriageway from the café difficult to see by approaching drivers during the hours of darkness and/or during adverse weather conditions. 2) The lack of appropriately positioned signage, warning approaching drivers of the possibility of vehicles crossing the carriageway from the café. 3) The speed of traffic on this stretch of the A66. 4) The sufficiency of the width of the central reservation to accommodate large vehicles fully without the danger of encroaching into either of the opposing carriageways. ”

    Source location

    Stephen Cloudsdale · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 3 · 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

    Implement upgraded junction, turning-vehicle and electronic warning signs, solar-powered road studs, and improved carriageway markings at Stainmore Café Services.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “National Highways is already in the process of promoting a focused improvement scheme in the immediate area of Stainmore Café Services which includes upgraded traffic signs and associated road markings. The scheme includes interactive electronic, vehicle activated signs that warn approaching drivers of both the junctions and vehicles turning. The scheme is on course to deliver the improvements by the end of October 2022.”

    Source location

    Response from National Highways Ltd
    Page 1 · response
    Published 4 February 2022

    Open published response

  9. Suffolk

    AI-generated summary

    Thomas Pickering · 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

    Thomas Pickering died at the scene of a road traffic collision on 26 August 2020 after his Kia collided with an oncoming Saab while overtaking a VW Golf. The report raises concern about whether additional signage or other preventative measures are needed at the site, described as a blind summit with a history of other collisions.

    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 signage warning of hidden dips at the site

    Wider context from the report

    “I am concerned as to whether further preventative steps can be taken to mitigate the risk of future RTC’s at the site given the apparent lack of signage – eg hidden dips, or signage relating to notification of recent incidents at the area to increase awareness eg the number of fatalities/collisions. ”

    Source location

    Thomas Pickering · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    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 signage notifying road users of recent incidents at the area

    Wider context from the report

    “I am concerned as to whether further preventative steps can be taken to mitigate the risk of future RTC’s at the site given the apparent lack of signage – eg hidden dips, or signage relating to notification of recent incidents at the area to increase awareness eg the number of fatalities/collisions. ”

    Source location

    Thomas Pickering · 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

    Design suitable locations for a pair of hidden-dip signs north of Wallers Farm access.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “For your information SCC Highways has assessed the Report and agreed to install a pair of hidden dip signs north of the Wallers Farm access, facing southbound traffic.”

    Source location

    2021-0289-Response-from-Suffolk-County-Council_Published
    Page 1 · response
    Published 9 September 2021

    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

    Erect new posts and a pair of hidden-dip signs facing southbound traffic north of Wallers Farm access.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “For your information SCC Highways has assessed the Report and agreed to install a pair of hidden dip signs north of the Wallers Farm access, facing southbound traffic.”

    Source location

    2021-0289-Response-from-Suffolk-County-Council_Published
    Page 1 · response
    Published 9 September 2021

    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 A137 is outside responsibility, so the safety concerns cannot be commented on.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “National Highways is responsible for the motorways and trunk roads in England and the A137 isn't a road we're responsible for so we can't comment on this matter. I see you sent this to Suffolk County Council as well so they'll have to respond to this.”

    Source location

    2021-0289-Response-from-National-Highways_Published
    Page 1 · response
    Published 9 September 2021

    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

    Suffolk County Council is responsible for responding to the safety concerns.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “National Highways is responsible for the motorways and trunk roads in England and the A137 isn't a road we're responsible for so we can't comment on this matter. I see you sent this to Suffolk County Council as well so they'll have to respond to this.”

    Source location

    2021-0289-Response-from-National-Highways_Published
    Page 1 · response
    Published 9 September 2021

    Open published response

  10. Cornwall and Isles of Scilly

    AI-generated summary

    Caitlin Ann SWAN · 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 28 December 2019, Caitlin Ann SWAN lost control of her bicycle while descending Tubbоn Hill, collided with a vehicle, and fell into the path of an oncoming vehicle, sustaining catastrophic head and neck injuries. The principal concern was that there were no signs warning road users of the junction with Trebost Lane, which was only visible 75 to 50 metres away and required vehicles to negotiate an acute turn at near walking pace.

    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 warning signs for the junction with Trebost Lane on Tubbоn Hill

    Wider context from the report

    “There are no signs on Tubbоn Hill to warn road users of the junction with Trebost Lane, notwithstanding that the junction is only visible between 75 and 50 metres away for a road user descending the hill and that any vehicles negotiating the acute left turn into Trebost Lane are likely to be almost stationary in the road at some point. ”

    Source location

    Caitlin Ann SWAN · 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 additional warning signs at the Trebost junction on Tubbion Hill.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Although I was unable to attend the inquest on the day, I subsequently viewed the recording and have also visited the site of the collision. I have discussed the findings of the inquest and your recommendations with senior officers of Cornwall Council, and am pleased to confirm that they have approved the provision of additional warning signing.”

    Source location

    2021-0121-Response-from-CORMAC-Redacted
    Page 1 · response
    Published 29 April 2021

    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

    Junction warning signs are not routinely required; their absence at this junction was not unusual given site conditions and collision history.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Notwithstanding this, I would like to correct a perhaps misleading impression that may have been given at the inquest about such signs. I note that at one point it was suggested that the provision of junction warning signs would be “normal”; this could imply the absence of such a sign is some form of specific omission, of course. I can assure you this is not the case, and the formal guidance on their provision is:”

    Source location

    2021-0121-Response-from-CORMAC-Redacted
    Page 1 · response
    Published 29 April 2021

    Open published response
Back to top

Data last updated 7 September 2026