Recurring concern

Failure to protect underage food-delivery riders from road traffic collisions

First to latest report 23 Sep 2025 — 5 Dec 2025

Reports that mention this concern
2
Times this concern has been raised
2
Stated actions linked to this concern
13

What this concern includes

Includes failures in arrangements specifically affecting the road safety of underage people carrying out food-delivery work, including oversight of licence rental or age restrictions where it permits underage riding, controls on powered two-wheeled delivery work, night-time or lone-working safeguards, and measures intended to prevent or reduce collision risk.

What is not included
  • Excludes general road-safety hazards, driver licensing or youth road-use concerns without an underage food-delivery work context.
  • Excludes adult food-delivery rider risks unless the assertion explicitly concerns the same underage food-delivery safety arrangement.
  • Excludes generic lone-working, exploitation, employment or licensing failures where road-collision risk to underage food-delivery riders is not materially identified.
  • Excludes clinical assessment or treatment failures after a road traffic collision unless the assertion concerns the prevention and control of the underage food-delivery road-safety risk.

Reports and published responses 2 reports

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

  1. Dorset

    AI-generated summary

    Leonardo Cardoso Machado · 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

    Leonardo Cardoso Machado, aged 17, died on 16 April 2023 after losing control of a motorcycle while travelling at speed and colliding with metal railings. The report raised concerns about limited oversight of rented food delivery licences being provided to children under 18, and the resulting risks of lone night work and road traffic 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

    Risk of road traffic collisions involving children working at night on powered two-wheeled vehicles

    Wider context from the report

    “1. During the inquest evidence was heard that: i. There is significant national concern about the “rental” of food delivery licences to under 18s. In general terms, food delivery platforms place age restrictions on those who can obtain a licence to deliver food. However, there appears to be no oversight of the rental of these licences to those under the age limit. This places children in a vulnerable position: lone working, often at night, riding electric or motorised scooters, mopeds or motorcycles and delivering to individuals that are not known to the drivers. 2. I have concerns with regard to the following: i. There appears to be no or limited oversight of the practice of “renting” a food delivery licence to children under 18 years of age, which I hear is a national issue; ii. As a consequence, children are working in the food delivery economy, which involves lone working at night, with deliveries being made to the home addresses of private individuals, placing the children in a vulnerable position; iii. That placing a child in a lone working environment at night and on the roads on electric or motorised scooters, mopeds or motorcycles also increases the risks of them coming to harm through a road traffic collision, leading to a risk of death. ”

    Source location

    Leonardo Cardoso Machado · 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

    Update and publish joint guidance on driving and riding safely for work.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Department for Transport (DfT) commented that the safety of anyone driving or riding on our roads is a priority, and that includes those who drive for work. The government expects that employers or engagers of anyone driving or riding for work to ensure that they are as safe as possible on our roads. DfT worked closely with the HSE to update the joint DfT/HSE guidance on work related road safety. The revised guidance, published in September 2021 and called Driving and riding safely for work, clearly sets out what commercial organisations and their workers, whether employees”

    Source location

    Response from HSE & Gov Dept
    Page 1 · response
    Published 8 December 2025

    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

    Road traffic accidents are generally for the police to investigate and enforce rather than HSE.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In respect of the road traffic accident itself, HSE views that road traffic accidents are generally a matter for the Police to investigate and enforce, rather than HSE, using the most applicable legislation. This is set out in Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 - Section 3.”

    Source location

    Response from HSE & Gov Dept
    Page 1 · response
    Published 8 December 2025

    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

    Practical limits constrain measures addressing lone working in delivery driving because the work inherently involves solo, deadline-driven and often nighttime activity with road risks.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “However, HSE acknowledges that there are practical limits to what can be done in the driver delivery sector because work like this inevitably involves working alone, to deadlines, often at night and with the attendant road risks.”

    Source location

    Response from HSE & Gov Dept
    Page 3 · response
    Published 8 December 2025

    Open published response

  2. Dorset

    AI-generated summary

    Leonardo Cardoso Machado · 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

    Leonardo Cardoso Machado, aged 17, died on 16 April 2023 after losing control of a motorcycle and colliding with metal railings while fleeing a police traffic stop. Concerns included limited oversight of rented food-delivery licences for children under 18, and the vulnerability and road-traffic risks associated with children working alone at night on motorised vehicles.

    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 protect child food-delivery workers from road traffic collision risks

    Wider context from the report

    “2. I have concerns with regard to the following: i. There appears to be no or limited oversight of the practice of “renting” a food delivery licence to children under 18 years of age, which I regard is a national issue; ii. As a consequence, children are working in the food delivery economy, which involves lone working at night, with deliveries being made to the home addresses of private individuals, placing the children in a vulnerable position; iii. That placing children in a lone working environment at night and on the roads on electric or motorised scooters, mopeds or motorcycles also increases the risks of them coming to harm through a road traffic collision, leading to a risk of death. ”

    Source location

    Leonardo Cardoso Machado · 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

    Verify couriers’ and substitutes’ identities and dates of birth through internal document checks and third-party fraud screening before approving accounts.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We would like to begin by stating unequivocally that everyone delivering on the Uber Eats platform must be at least 18 years of age. This requirement is set out clearly in our Courier Terms and Conditions that all couriers sign in order to use the app and we have a number of robust checks in place (outlined below) to ensure this requirement is met. If we become aware of someone delivering on the platform who may be under 18 we take immediate action, including reporting to law enforcement or relevant authorities where necessary.”

    Source location

    Response from Uber Eats
    Page 2 · response
    Published 29 September 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

    Use random and risk-triggered real-time facial verification to detect unauthorised account sharing and confirm the account user matches the registered identity.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “To help ensure that only the account holder or registered substitutes (i.e. those confirmed to be over 18) are using the account, Uber Eats uses industry leading account-sharing detection technology. This includes real-time identity verification software (launched in 2019), which requires couriers to take a selfie that is compared in real time with the profile photo that has been matched with their registered identity documentation. These real-time facial verification checks occur randomly, at least once a day and also in circumstances where we suspect that an individual performing the delivery may not be the same person as the accountholder. In addition to these checks, we monitor for suspicious behaviours that may indicate attempts to circumvent our security controls, which can trigger additional identity verification checks.”

    Source location

    Response from Uber Eats
    Page 2 · response
    Published 29 September 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

    Refine and add account-sharing detection signals to identify attempts to circumvent platform security controls.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We are continually enhancing our processes to ensure our platform is safe. Although action taken was not in direct response to this incident, we have refined and added to our suite of account-sharing detection signals in recent years.”

    Source location

    Response from Uber Eats
    Page 2 · response
    Published 29 September 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

    Update and publish joint work-related road-safety guidance for commercial drivers and riders.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Department for Transport (DfT) commented that the safety of anyone driving or riding on our roads is a priority, and that includes those who drive for work. The government expects that employers or engagers of anyone driving or riding for work to ensure that they are as safe as possible on our roads. DfT worked closely with the HSE to update the joint DfT/HSE guidance on work related road safety. The revised guidance, published in September 2021 and called Driving and riding safely for work, clearly sets out what commercial organisations and their workers, whether employees”

    Source location

    Response from Health and Safety Executive
    Page 1 · response
    Published 29 September 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

    Introduce enhanced substitute checks, including preregistration, biometric verification and document checks, with removal of non-compliant accounts.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Under the UK’s employment law, self-employed independent couriers have the legal, unfettered right to use a substitute and Just Eat provides guidance to couriers on how they can do this safely and responsibly. Whilst couriers have the legal right to substitute their work, this can only be to others who are over the age of 18 and have the legal right to work in the UK. We have recently introduced further enhanced checks to ensure that substitutes meet the requirements that we set for all couriers on our network. Couriers must now pre-register any substitutes and are given a short grace period to complete biometric checks and to submit documents proving their age and that they have the right to work. If these documents are not provided, both the main account holder and their substitutes will be removed from the network.”

    Source location

    Response from Just Eats
    Page 1 · response
    Published 29 September 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

    Verify riders’ and registered substitutes’ identity, age and right to work before granting or authorising platform access.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “1. It is a requirement that any rider engaged with Deliveroo is at least 18 years old.”

    Source location

    Response from Deliveroo
    Page 2 · response
    Published 29 September 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

    Run daily facial-recognition checks against onboarding identification and suspend accounts that fail until the checks are passed.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “4. We run facial recognition checks to ensure that the person using an account is either the main account holder or a registered substitute and to detect and prevent unauthorised use of the platform. These checks are run at least daily for all riders in the UK. This process requires the rider to submit a live video selfie, which is then checked by our third party supplier to make sure it matches the ID they provided during onboarding. If riders do not pass, their accounts are placed out of service, meaning that they cannot accept orders until they have passed a check.”

    Source location

    Response from Deliveroo
    Page 2 · response
    Published 29 September 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

    Increase facial-recognition check frequency and sophistication, including randomised intraday checks.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “6. We have recently increased the frequency and sophistication of these checks, including randomising the frequency of intra-day checks to make it harder for people to predict the checks.”

    Source location

    Response from Deliveroo
    Page 2 · response
    Published 29 September 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

    Review failed facial-recognition checks and terminate supplier agreements where they evidence unauthorised account sharing or fraud.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “7. Our facial recognition technology identifies any failed checks that indicate someone other than the main account holder, or registered substitute, may have been trying”

    Source location

    Response from Deliveroo
    Page 2 · response
    Published 29 September 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

    Identify suspicious activity and unregistered substitute use, taking enforcement action including termination of supplier agreements where necessary.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “8. We also have other measures in place to enable us to identify suspicious activity or if an unregistered substitute is attempting to use our platform. Where we identify breaches of our processes, we take appropriate action, including terminating supplier agreements with riders where necessary.”

    Source location

    Response from Deliveroo
    Page 3 · response
    Published 29 September 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

    Identify applicants previously terminated for allowing unregistered substitutes and prevent renewed engagement where applicable.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We stop working with riders who allow an unregistered substitute to use their rider account and will not work with those riders in the future. We have processes in place to enable us to identify whether a rider applicant has previously had a supplier agreement with us terminated for allowing an unregistered substitute to provide services on their behalf.”

    Source location

    Response from Deliveroo
    Page 3 · response
    Published 29 September 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

    Strengthen rider-account compliance checks and processes through collaboration with the Home Office and other delivery platforms.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “You might be aware that over the course of this year, we have been working closely with the Home Office and other food delivery platforms to enhance compliance with right to work legislation by food delivery couriers. We have significantly strengthened checks and processes that we already had in place to ensure that rider accounts are only being used by”

    Source location

    Response from Deliveroo
    Page 1 · response
    Published 29 September 2025

    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

    Police, rather than HSE, are responsible for investigating and enforcing road traffic accidents.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In respect of the road traffic accident itself, HSE views that road traffic accidents are generally a matter for the Police to investigate and enforce, rather than HSE, using the most applicable legislation. This is set out in Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 - Section 3.”

    Source location

    Response from Health and Safety Executive
    Page 1 · response
    Published 29 September 2025

    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

    Practical limits constrain measures to reduce risks in delivery driving because the work inevitably involves lone working, deadlines and night-time road risks.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “However, HSE acknowledges that there are practical limits to what can be done in the driver delivery sector because work like this inevitably involves working alone, to deadlines, often at night and with the attendant road risks.”

    Source location

    Response from Health and Safety Executive
    Page 3 · response
    Published 29 September 2025

    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