Recurring concern

Failure to make roadside obstructions visible to approaching road users

Get email alerts

Request correction

First reported 31 Mar 2014•Latest report 17 Sep 2019

Definition

What this concern includes

Includes dedicated warning, marking, lighting or conspicuity controls for stranded vehicles, projecting vehicle equipment or comparable roadside obstructions on public roads, including warning devices for a stranded HGV and clear markings for a bale chute on a public highway.

Not included

Excludes general road-warning signage for fixed road hazards, which belongs to the existing road-warning-signage concern.
Excludes vehicle forward-visibility, road layout, lighting, collision-risk and highway-maintenance deficiencies where no roadside-obstruction conspicuity or warning control is identified.
Excludes generic public warnings or product labelling unrelated to making a roadside obstruction visible to approaching road users.
Excludes driver behaviour or collisions where the obstruction-warning control itself is not deficient.

Reports: 2
Individual concerns: 4
Date range: 2014–2019
Stated actions: 7

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.

AGCO Limited1

DAF Trucks Limited1

Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency1

Road Haulage Association Limited1

Traffic Commissioners for Great Britain1

Whitelock Plant Ltd.1

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 Sep2019
West Yorkshire Eastern
Concerns raised2
1. Failure of HGV rear hazard warning lights to remain working and sufficiently conspicuous
2. Lack of an HGV warning device for alerting approaching motorists to a stranded vehicle
This report raised 2 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response 7
1. Action
  Instruct drivers to check rear light lenses during shifts and clean them when necessary.
  Stated by Whitelock Developments LtdStated in progress
2. Action
  Consider fitting rear auxiliary warning lights to each vehicle.
  Stated by Whitelock Developments LtdStated planned
3. Action
  Raise awareness of equipment shortages and driver training through weekly member emails and the members’ app.
  Stated by Road Haulage Association LimitedStated planned
1. Action
  Publish a members’ magazine article examining the shortcomings identified by the coroner.
  Stated by Road Haulage Association LimitedStated planned
2. Action
  Raise equipment and driver-training issues at forthcoming member events, briefings and future compliance conferences.
  Stated by Road Haulage Association LimitedStated planned
3. Action
  Issue a PDI safety kit containing two warning triangles with all new vehicles sold through the sales network.
  Stated by DAF Trucks LimitedStated completed
4. Action
  Provide foldable reflective roadside warning triangles in each HGV.
  Stated by Whitelock Developments LtdStated in progress
Respondent positions 6
1. Position
  Another organisation controlled completion approval and rear-lamp conspicuity, so the manufacturer considered no action necessary on that issue.
  Stated by DAF Trucks LimitedRedirects responsibility
1. Position
  The original lighting system was replaced with alternative LED lamps, removing bulb monitoring, so the manufacturer considered no action necessary.
  Stated by DAF Trucks LimitedRedirects responsibility
2. Position
  The trade association lacks authority to compel haulage operators to address equipment and training shortcomings.
  Stated by Road Haulage Association LimitedOutside remit
3. Position
  The supplied safety kit and operator responsibilities were considered sufficient, so no further action was deemed necessary regarding warning triangles.
  Stated by DAF Trucks LimitedExisting arrangements considered sufficient
4. Position
  The Department for Transport is responsible for considering vehicle-design legislation and mandatory warning-triangle requirements.
  Stated by Traffic Commissioners for Great BritainRedirects responsibility
5. Position
  Regulators and the Department for Transport hold the relevant powers over enforcement, operator expectations and legislation.
  Stated by Road Haulage Association LimitedRedirects responsibility
AI-generated summary

Dr Jonathan Edward Ball · 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 24 November 2018, Dr Jonathan Edward Ball died after his Skoda collided with a stationary 32-ton HGV on the A647 Stanningley bypass near Pudsey, Leeds. The substantive concerns related to the absence of advance warning equipment and emergency-service notification for the stranded HGV, and the limited visibility or resilience of its rear hazard warning lights.

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 HGV rear hazard warning lights to remain working and sufficiently conspicuous
Wider context from the report
“(3) The evidence of the other motorists on the A647 at the material time indicated that the rear offside hazard warning light was hard to see (or thought not to be working) thus giving the impression that the HGV was indicating to turn left (and thereby potentially confusing approaching motorists). In such circumstances there was no added resilience to the lights displayed, such as would have been provided by having duplicate indicator/hazard lights on the rear corners of the HGV. Given the arduous work of such vehicles and the propensity for the light to become dirty at the end of a working day, concern was expressed at the Inquest as to the danger which might be created in the event (a) the HGV broke down in a hazardous location and (b) the rear lights were not working or insufficiently conspicuous. ”
Source location
Dr Jonathan Edward Ball · Prevention of Future Deaths report
Page 1 · 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 an HGV warning device for alerting approaching motorists to a stranded vehicle
Wider context from the report
“(1) The HGV was not equipped with a device (such as a warning triangle) which the driver could have positioned some way before his stranded vehicle to warn oncoming motorists of the hazard presented by a stranded 32 ton HGV blocking one lane of a dual carriageway in darkness. ”
Source location
Dr Jonathan Edward Ball · 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
Instruct drivers to check rear light lenses during shifts and clean them when necessary.

Verbatim wording from the response
“(3) The concerns raised by the evidence, indicating warning lights were not as conspicuous as they might, may have resulted from the adverse weather conditions in the winter season. Drivers have now, via a Toolbox Talk, been instructed to check rear light lenses periodically through their shift and wipe clean when required. This again is included within the driver’s induction to capture new staff. All lights are also checked as working, as part of the existing daily pre-use driver checks. This action has been instigated and will be complete by end November 2019 or sooner.”

Source location
2019-0507-Response-from-Whitelocks-Development-Ltd-Redacted
Page 1 · response
Published 14 May 2020
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
Consider fitting rear auxiliary warning lights to each vehicle.

Verbatim wording from the response
“In line with the suggestion of additional/duplicate warning lights, each vehicle is under consideration for fitting of rear auxiliary warning lights either linked to the hazard lights or the amber cab beacon.”

Source location
2019-0507-Response-from-Whitelocks-Development-Ltd-Redacted
Page 1 · response
Published 14 May 2020
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
Raise awareness of equipment shortages and driver training through weekly member emails and the members’ app.

Verbatim wording from the response
“Having set out the above, I can say that we, at the RHA, are keen to assist in any way we can and to this end we are proposing taking the following steps to raise awareness of the issues surrounding a lack of equipment (including warning triangles and additional emergency lighting) as well as driver training:”

Source location
2019-0507-Response-from-The-Road-Haulage-Association-Redacted-1
Page 1 · response
Published 14 May 2020
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
Publish a members’ magazine article examining the shortcomings identified by the coroner.

Verbatim wording from the response
“Having set out the above, I can say that we, at the RHA, are keen to assist in any way we can and to this end we are proposing taking the following steps to raise awareness of the issues surrounding a lack of equipment (including warning triangles and additional emergency lighting) as well as driver training:”

Source location
2019-0507-Response-from-The-Road-Haulage-Association-Redacted-1
Page 1 · response
Published 14 May 2020
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
Raise equipment and driver-training issues at forthcoming member events, briefings and future compliance conferences.

Verbatim wording from the response
“Having set out the above, I can say that we, at the RHA, are keen to assist in any way we can and to this end we are proposing taking the following steps to raise awareness of the issues surrounding a lack of equipment (including warning triangles and additional emergency lighting) as well as driver training:”

Source location
2019-0507-Response-from-The-Road-Haulage-Association-Redacted-1
Page 1 · response
Published 14 May 2020
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
Issue a PDI safety kit containing two warning triangles with all new vehicles sold through the sales network.

Verbatim wording from the response
“a. DAF Trucks Ltd issues to all new vehicles sold via the sales network a PDI safety kit. This Bagged kit (DAF part number 9507301) includes x2 Hazard Warning Triangles x3 Tachograph paper roll, x1 Hi- Viz vest and a pair of safety working gloves. A photo of this kit is shown in Appendix 1.”

Source location
2019-0507-Response-from-DAF-trucks-Ltd-Redacted-1
Page 2 · response
Published 14 May 2020
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
Provide foldable reflective roadside warning triangles in each HGV.

Verbatim wording from the response
“(1) The concern over a lack of any advance warning aids (such as a warning triangle) has been addressed with the purchase of foldable reflective roadside warning triangles, to be placed within each of our HGVs. Instruction to our drivers in the requirement of use (if/when safe to do so) in the event of a breakdown upon the highway where it has not been possible to pull up clear of the highway, has been communicated via a Toolbox Talk and added to the company induction to capture all/any new drivers. This action has been instigated and will be complete by end November 2019 or sooner.”

Source location
2019-0507-Response-from-Whitelocks-Development-Ltd-Redacted
Page 1 · response
Published 14 May 2020
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
Another organisation controlled completion approval and rear-lamp conspicuity, so the manufacturer considered no action necessary on that issue.

Verbatim wording from the response
“a. DAF Trucks supplies vehicles such as OG034509 FAD CF 370, from factory as a “Chassis Cab” only vehicle. The vehicle therefore is incomplete (No Body) at point of delivery, to the customers chosen Body Builder, in this case a company called “Thompsons of Blackburn”, at which point the “tipper” or “skip body” and its associated equipment, including the rear light arrangement, would have been permanently mounted to the new body and commissioned by Thompsons of Blackburn. The end choice of lamp arrangement and the conspicuousness of the rear lamps in the final phases of build for this vehicle, would have therefore been controlled by the completion of the build in accordance with Thompsons of Blackburn’s chosen Legislative Approval methods, before the vehicle was moved to the PDI dealer (Lancashire DAF in this case) prior to delivery to the original customer MV Commercials, Brownsburn Ind.”

Source location
2019-0507-Response-from-DAF-trucks-Ltd-Redacted-1
Page 3 · response
Published 14 May 2020
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 original lighting system was replaced with alternative LED lamps, removing bulb monitoring, so the manufacturer considered no action necessary.

Verbatim wording from the response
“All DAF vehicles are supplied with rear light assemblies secured to transport bars and with regards to the case of OG034509 the vehicle was supplied with standard incandescent rear lamp cluster part number 1875581 (Right) and 1875580 (Left). These OE rear lamps comply with Regulation 48 of UNECE-R48 light signalling devices. These OE rear lamps work in conjunction with an electronic safety system of “bulb monitoring”. This bulb monitoring feature, advises the driver by an in cab display if any bulb of the vehicle lighting system fails during operation.”

Source location
2019-0507-Response-from-DAF-trucks-Ltd-Redacted-1
Page 3 · response
Published 14 May 2020
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 trade association lacks authority to compel haulage operators to address equipment and training shortcomings.

Verbatim wording from the response
“We, at the RHA, are a trade association who have strong links with the industry and do represent a significant proportion of goods vehicle operators (we have some 7,000 members). However, as a trade association, we do not have a specific mandate or authority by which we can force operators to take action in an attempt to prevent similar shortcomings such as those that led to the tragic death of Dr Ball. Within the haulage industry, the organisations and individuals that may have power should include the industry regulator (the traffic commissioners), the primary enforcement authority (the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency – DVSA) as well as those responsible for legislation (the Department for Transport).”

Source location
2019-0507-Response-from-The-Road-Haulage-Association-Redacted-1
Page 1 · response
Published 14 May 2020
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 supplied safety kit and operator responsibilities were considered sufficient, so no further action was deemed necessary regarding warning triangles.

Verbatim wording from the response
“a. DAF Trucks Ltd issues to all new vehicles sold via the sales network a PDI safety kit. This Bagged kit (DAF part number 9507301) includes x2 Hazard Warning Triangles x3 Tachograph paper roll, x1 Hi- Viz vest and a pair of safety working gloves. A photo of this kit is shown in Appendix 1.”

Source location
2019-0507-Response-from-DAF-trucks-Ltd-Redacted-1
Page 2 · response
Published 14 May 2020
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 Department for Transport is responsible for considering vehicle-design legislation and mandatory warning-triangle requirements.

Verbatim wording from the response
“The Senior Traffic Commissioner was concerned to learn of the events leading to Dr Ball’s death and of course shares your desire to prevent similar circumstances arising in the future. You will appreciate that it is the role of Government, through the Department for Transport, to consider the need to legislate on the matters relating to vehicle design or to impose a mandatory requirement for warning triangles to be deployed at a time of a breakdown. To assist you we have identified the relevant section of the Department for Transport, namely the Freight, Operator Licensing and Roadworthiness Division at:”

Source location
2019-0507-Response-from-the-Office-of-the-Traffic-Commissioner-Redacted
Page 2 · response
Published 14 May 2020
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
Regulators and the Department for Transport hold the relevant powers over enforcement, operator expectations and legislation.

Verbatim wording from the response
“We, at the RHA, are a trade association who have strong links with the industry and do represent a significant proportion of goods vehicle operators (we have some 7,000 members). However, as a trade association, we do not have a specific mandate or authority by which we can force operators to take action in an attempt to prevent similar shortcomings such as those that led to the tragic death of Dr Ball. Within the haulage industry, the organisations and individuals that may have power should include the industry regulator (the traffic commissioners), the primary enforcement authority (the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency – DVSA) as well as those responsible for legislation (the Department for Transport).”

Source location
2019-0507-Response-from-The-Road-Haulage-Association-Redacted-1
Page 1 · response
Published 14 May 2020
Open published response
31 Mar2014
Shropshire, Telford and Wrekin
Concerns raised2
1. Failure to clearly mark bale chutes for visibility on public highways
2. Failure to keep bale chutes in the raised position during public-road travel
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.

No linked response statements
No respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
AI-generated summary

Valerie Anne HANCOX · 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

Valerie Anne HANCOX died from injuries sustained in a collision on the A5 at Burlington, Shifnal, Shropshire, on 14 September 2012. The collision occurred when a tractor and baler obstructed the oncoming carriageway during darkness. Concerns included the bale chute being left lowered, unmarked, and painted matt grey, making it difficult for approaching road users to see.

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 clearly mark bale chutes for visibility on public highways
Wider context from the report
“(1) The bale chute, when on the public highway, should not be in its lowered position. However it appears to be standard farm practice to leave the bale chute down when moving from one field to another along or to cross a public highway. (2) The bale chute was just short of 2 metres in length and falls under the legislation that, when on roads, it should be clearly marked. If it were over 2 metres then it would have to be lit. (3) The bale chute had no markings and was painted matt grey. The manufacturers state in their handbook that the chute should be stored in the up position for travel on roads. This may explain why there is no marking but relies on the driver adhering to that instruction. (4) Given the potential for obstructing the highway, all the more so as the manufacturer's instructions appear to be not followed, bale chutes should be clearly marked so that anyone approaching side on, day or night, as the deceased’s husband was, should be able to see it. ”
Source location
Valerie Anne HANCOX · 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 keep bale chutes in the raised position during public-road travel
Wider context from the report
“(1) The bale chute, when on the public highway, should not be in its lowered position. However it appears to be standard farm practice to leave the bale chute down when moving from one field to another along or to cross a public highway. (2) The bale chute was just short of 2 metres in length and falls under the legislation that, when on roads, it should be clearly marked. If it were over 2 metres then it would have to be lit. (3) The bale chute had no markings and was painted matt grey. The manufacturers state in their handbook that the chute should be stored in the up position for travel on roads. This may explain why there is no marking but relies on the driver adhering to that instruction. (4) Given the potential for obstructing the highway, all the more so as the manufacturer's instructions appear to be not followed, bale chutes should be clearly marked so that anyone approaching side on, day or night, as the deceased’s husband was, should be able to see it. ”
Source location
Valerie Anne HANCOX · Prevention of Future Deaths report
Page 2 · concerns
Open source report

Data last updated 7 September 2026

What this concern includes

Not included

Reports over time

Concerns raised2

Failure of HGV rear hazard warning lights to remain working and sufficiently conspicuous

Lack of an HGV warning device for alerting approaching motorists to a stranded vehicle

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.7

Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.6

Concerns raised2

Failure to clearly mark bale chutes for visibility on public highways

Failure to keep bale chutes in the raised position during public-road travel

Actions described in response 7

Respondent positions 6