Recurring concern

Unreliable public understanding of smart motorway safety arrangements

First to latest report 19 Jan 2021 — 16 Sep 2022

Reports that mention this concern: 2
Times this concern has been raised: 2
Stated actions linked to this concern: 7

What this concern includes

Includes failures in public-facing information and communication arrangements that explain smart motorway operation, distinguish it from traditional motorway operation, and tell road users how to respond to or report safety-critical problems on smart motorways.

What is not included

Excludes physical smart-motorway design, emergency refuge provision, stationary-vehicle detection and monitoring failures where public understanding or information provision is not the unsafe condition.
Excludes general motorway safety information unrelated to smart-motorway operation or the actions required when a safety-critical problem occurs.
Excludes ambulance, police or highway-authority response failures after a road user has correctly reported a problem.
Excludes generic public communication deficiencies without a specific smart-motorway safety-information context.

Trends

Reports over time

Reports mentioning this concern, 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.

National Highways2

Department for Transport1

Reports and published responses 2 reports

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

16 Sep2022
South Yorkshire (Eastern)
Concerns raised1
1. Failure to effectively communicate to road users the need to alert authorities to problems on the motorway network
Linked response

National Highways
Stated actions 5
1. National Highways
  Maintain road-safety campaign guidance, including specific advice for motorway breakdowns.
2. National Highways
  Deliver eCall awareness campaigns explaining how drivers and people assisting others can summon emergency help.
3. National Highways
  Work with relevant authorities to update The Highway Code with eCall emergency-contact guidance.
1. National Highways
  Conduct a cross-organisation study of further ways to increase public awareness of how to respond when someone is in difficulty on the roads.
2. National Highways
  Update eCall communications through a further campaign, the Driving for Better Business programme and staff communications.
Respondent positions 1
1. National Highways
  The Department for Transport is responsible for deciding whether to update The Highway Code to improve public guidance on reporting motorway problems.
  Redirects responsibility
AI-generated summary

Nargis Begum · 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 9 September 2018, Nargis Begum was fatally injured after a vehicle in which she was a passenger stopped in a live lane of the M1 motorway and was struck by another vehicle. The principal concerns were limited public understanding of the need to alert National Highways about stationary vehicles and insufficient emphasis and effectiveness of public information campaigns about this responsibility.

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 effectively communicate to road users the need to alert authorities to problems on the motorway network
Wider context from the report
“(1) The lack of public understanding regarding the need for them to call National Highways should they identify a problem on the motorway network such as a stationary vehicle. (2) Despite television, radio and social media campaigns regarding SMART motorways, the lack of emphasis on the importance of road users responsibility to alert the authorities to any such problems. (3) Despite public information referred to during the course of the evidence, the above message does not appear to have been a priority and does not appear to have effectively reached the public. ”
Source location
Nargis Begum · Prevention of Future Deaths report
Page 2 · concerns
Open source report
Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

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

PFD Monitor interpretation
Maintain road-safety campaign guidance, including specific advice for motorway breakdowns.

Verbatim wording from the response
“We have an ongoing programme of road safety campaign activity, intended to provide important guidance to drivers to make journeys safer, easier and more reliable. This ongoing campaign work includes a specific section on breakdown advice.”

Source location
Response from National Highways
Page 1 · response
Published 18 June 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
Deliver eCall awareness campaigns explaining how drivers and people assisting others can summon emergency help.

Verbatim wording from the response
“We worked with stakeholders to launch England’s first major campaign, in 2021, to raise awareness of the eCall or ‘SOS’ button function, which increasing numbers of newer cars come with and which can be used to call for help by the driver or someone else needing help, if a situation requires emergency services. This was on digital channels, including a dedicated campaign page on our external website. The Highway Code, which was updated in September 2021, also now advises the use of eCall to contact police and communicate a location directly to a 999 operator under The Highway Code current rules 277, 279 and 283.”

Source location
Response from National Highways
Page 2 · response
Published 18 June 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
Work with relevant authorities to update The Highway Code with eCall emergency-contact guidance.

Verbatim wording from the response
“We worked with stakeholders to launch England’s first major campaign, in 2021, to raise awareness of the eCall or ‘SOS’ button function, which increasing numbers of newer cars come with and which can be used to call for help by the driver or someone else needing help, if a situation requires emergency services. This was on digital channels, including a dedicated campaign page on our external website. The Highway Code, which was updated in September 2021, also now advises the use of eCall to contact police and communicate a location directly to a 999 operator under The Highway Code current rules 277, 279 and 283.”

Source location
Response from National Highways
Page 2 · response
Published 18 June 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
Conduct a cross-organisation study of further ways to increase public awareness of how to respond when someone is in difficulty on the roads.

Verbatim wording from the response
“- Secondly, the letter also confirmed a commitment to conduct a study to explore additional actions that could be taken to further increase awareness among the public of what they can do if they spot someone in difficulty on any road. This study, on which work started in September 2022, will, amongst the other actions stated in this response, cover the three areas of concern raised by the Coroner.”

Source location
Response from National Highways
Page 2 · response
Published 18 June 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 eCall communications through a further campaign, the Driving for Better Business programme and staff communications.

Verbatim wording from the response
“We will include an update on the eCall campaign and include that the function can be used to help both the driver of the vehicle which has that function, and to help others in difficulty. We will do this via a further campaign, ‘Driving for Better Business’ programme¹ and through our own staff.”

Source location
Response from National Highways
Page 3 · response
Published 18 June 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
The Department for Transport is responsible for deciding whether to update The Highway Code to improve public guidance on reporting motorway problems.

Verbatim wording from the response
“- Firstly, as DfT has responsibility for The Highway Code, I shared the Coroner’s view that a further update to The Highway Code may be beneficial to help the public know what actions to take should they identify a problem when driving, such as a stationary vehicle. We understand DfT are currently giving this consideration.”

Source location
Response from National Highways
Page 2 · response
Published 18 June 2025
Open published response
19 Jan2021
South Yorkshire (Western)
Concerns raised1
1. Motorist confusion caused by mixed smart and traditional motorways
This report raised 5 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Linked responses

Department for Transport
National Highways
Stated actions 2
1. Department for Transport
  Abolish dynamic hard shoulder motorways.
2. National Highways
  End use of dynamic hard shoulders by converting them to permanent traffic lanes.
Respondent positions 1
1. Department for Transport
  Highways England is responsible for addressing the points raised about smart motorway safety.
  Redirects responsibility
AI-generated summary

JASON LEE MERCER and ALEXANDRU MURGEANU · 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 7 June 2019, Jason Lee Mercer and Alexandru Murgeanu were involved in a minor collision on the M1 Northbound and stopped in an active lane. About six minutes later, both were struck by a Mercedes goods vehicle and died at the scene. The report identifies concerns about the absence of a hard shoulder on smart motorways, driver awareness, detection of stationary vehicles, and the need for a wider review of smart motorways.

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
Motorist confusion caused by mixed smart and traditional motorways
Wider context from the report
“• The confusion caused to motorists posed by a mixture of smart motorways and traditional motorways ”
Source location
JASON LEE MERCER and ALEXANDRU MURGEANU · 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
Abolish dynamic hard shoulder motorways.

Verbatim wording from the response
“Moreover, I believe that a lack of consistency on different types of smart motorways might cause confusion and we have already committed to abolishing the "dynamic hard shoulder" (DHS) motorways, where the hard shoulder operates only part-time and is a live running lane the rest of the time. Highways England is converting all DHS smart motorways into all lane running to provide a less confusing environment for motorists.”

Source location
2021-0013-Response-from-DFT-Redacted
Page 2 · response
Published 26 January 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
End use of dynamic hard shoulders by converting them to permanent traffic lanes.

Verbatim wording from the response
“• Ending the use of dynamic hard shoulders by March 2025”

Source location
2021-0013-Response-from-Highways-England-Redacted
Page 3 · response
Published 26 January 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
Highways England is responsible for addressing the points raised about smart motorway safety.

Verbatim wording from the response
“I understand that Highways England is addressing the points you raise in further detail.”

Source location
2021-0013-Response-from-DFT-Redacted
Page 2 · response
Published 26 January 2021
Open published response

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

Data last updated 7 September 2026

What this concern includes

Trends

Reports mentioning this concern, over time

Concerns raised1

Failure to effectively communicate to road users the need to alert authorities to problems on the motorway network

Linked response

Stated actions An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.5

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

Concerns raised1

Motorist confusion caused by mixed smart and traditional motorways

Linked responses

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

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

Stated actions 5

Respondent positions 1

Stated actions 2

Respondent positions 1