Recurring concern

Incomplete recording of contributory factors in road-collision statistics

Get email alerts

Request correction

First reported 17 Apr 2025•Latest report 17 Apr 2025

Definition

What this concern includes

Includes failures in the road-collision data-collection and recording process that omit, misclassify or obscure contributory factors relevant to road-user safety, including dementia, defective eyesight and comparable driver or collision-risk factors.

Not included

Excludes general under-recording of collisions or injuries where the deficiency is not specifically the recording of contributory factors.
Excludes clinical diagnosis, driver-fitness assessment or road-safety interventions where the collision-statistics recording process is not deficient.
Excludes generic data-quality, software or reporting failures unrelated to road-collision contributory-factor information.

Reports: 2
Individual concerns: 2
Date range: 2025–2025
Stated actions: 2

Reports over time

Reports about this concern issued each year.

* 2026 is projected from reports observed to 7 Sep 2026.

Most frequent recipients

Reports about this concern sent to each recipient.

Department for Transport2

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.

17 Apr2025
Lancashire and Blackburn with Darwen
Concerns raised1
1. Non-standardised collision data collection obscuring defective-eyesight involvement
This report raised 7 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response 2
1. Action
  Work with SCRICS to review and improve the collection and collation of STATS19 data on vision-related collision factors.
  Stated by Department for TransportStated planned
2. Action
  Continue engaging police forces to develop a more standardised approach to roadside eyesight testing at or shortly after collisions.
  Stated by Department for TransportStated in progress
AI-generated summary

Mary Frances Cunningham and 3 others · 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

Mary Frances Cunningham, Grace Foulds, Anne Elizabeth Ferguson and Peter Anthony Westwell died in separate road traffic collisions involving drivers whose eyesight was below the legal standard for driving. The report raises concerns about the UK licensing system, including reliance on self-reporting, the lack of periodic visual checks, and the limitations of the number-plate test. It states that the DVLA continued to license the drivers involved despite their impaired vision.

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
Non-standardised collision data collection obscuring defective-eyesight involvement
Wider context from the report
“The latest government figures record 1624 fatalities, 28,087 life changing serious injuries and 103,266 slight injuries accounting for 60,000 hospital admissions a year. Due to the Stats 19 data recording parameters, it is likely this is a substantial underestimate the actual number of road collisions from the National Travel Survey being approximately 600,000 and from the Department of Work and Pensions Compensation Recovery Unit 446,976. Data collection is further complicated by historical IT issues between constabularies resulting in a non-standardised reporting software. According to the Department for Transport uncorrected defective eyesight only occurred in 56 of the 15,355 road deaths recorded between January 2014 and January 2023, or 0.224% of all deaths. ”
Source location
Mary Frances Cunningham and 3 others · Prevention of Future Deaths report
Page 5 · 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
Work with SCRICS to review and improve the collection and collation of STATS19 data on vision-related collision factors.

Verbatim wording from the response
“My officials have advised that the STATS19 system for collecting and reporting road traffic collision data is unable to capture detailed information that identifies the causes of collisions. Many vision-related conditions may not manifest in ways that are immediately apparent following a road traffic collision. My Department will work with the Standing Committee on Road Injury Collision Statistics (SCRICS) to review and improve the collection and collation of STATS19 data. Officials will also continue to engage with police forces to develop a more standardised approach to roadside eyesight testing at the scene of the accident or shortly after to ensure that all relevant data is captured and reported accurately.”

Source location
Response from Department for Transport
Page 3 · response
Published 25 April 2025
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 engaging police forces to develop a more standardised approach to roadside eyesight testing at or shortly after collisions.

Verbatim wording from the response
“My officials have advised that the STATS19 system for collecting and reporting road traffic collision data is unable to capture detailed information that identifies the causes of collisions. Many vision-related conditions may not manifest in ways that are immediately apparent following a road traffic collision. My Department will work with the Standing Committee on Road Injury Collision Statistics (SCRICS) to review and improve the collection and collation of STATS19 data. Officials will also continue to engage with police forces to develop a more standardised approach to roadside eyesight testing at the scene of the accident or shortly after to ensure that all relevant data is captured and reported accurately.”

Source location
Response from Department for Transport
Page 3 · response
Published 25 April 2025
Open published response
17 Apr2025
Lancashire and Blackburn with Darwen
Concerns raised1
1. Under-recording of dementia in collision statistics
This report raised 2 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Respondent positions 1
1. Position
  STATS19 cannot capture all medical contributory factors because detailed identification would impose practical burdens on police officers.
  Stated by Department for TransportUnable to act
AI-generated summary

Sheila Margaret Edwards · 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

Sheila Margaret Edwards was a front-seat passenger in a car whose driver became unresponsive, leading to a head-on collision on 8 January 2023. The report identified concerns that drivers with dementia and other conditions may not recognise or report them to the DVLA, creating risks to other road users, and that such conditions may be under-recorded in collision data.

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
Under-recording of dementia in collision statistics
Wider context from the report
“4. As a result of the way in which collision data is collected using Stats 19, there is a significant likelihood that dementia is under recorded in collision statistics. The nation this point regarding collision data regarding the visual aspect of collisions, the PFD report into the deaths of Mary Cunningham, Grace Foulds, Anne Ferguson and Peter Westwell should be consulted. ”
Source location
Sheila Margaret Edwards · Prevention of Future Deaths report
Page 2 · concerns
Open source report
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
STATS19 cannot capture all medical contributory factors because detailed identification would impose practical burdens on police officers.

Verbatim wording from the response
“I note that you have raised concerns about the STATS19 system used in GB for collecting and reporting road traffic collision data. The Department acknowledges that STATS19 has limitations in identifying the causes of collisions in detail, particularly regarding the recording of medical conditions such as dementia or cognitive impairment as a contributory factor. These limitations are set out in the guidance provided (for example, the guidance on contributory factors). Contributory factors are based on the judgement of police officers at the scene of an accident or shortly afterwards. As a result, conditions such as those affecting cognitive function may go unrecorded, especially if the impairment is not immediately apparent or if the officer is unaware of the driver’s medical history.”

Source location
Response from Department for Transport
Page 3 · response
Published 24 April 2025
Open published response

Data last updated 7 September 2026

What this concern includes

Not included

Reports over time

Concerns raised1

Non-standardised collision data collection obscuring defective-eyesight involvement

Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.2

Concerns raised1

Under-recording of dementia in collision statistics

Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1

Actions described in response 2

Respondent positions 1