Concerns raised 3 Lack of guidance on signage following application of thin surface treatments View source Failure to adapt vehicle speeds to the early-life properties of thin surface treatments View source Unpredictable vehicle behaviour from reduced or changing friction during the early life of thin surface treatments View source
Actions described in response An action is something this recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised. 1
Action
Share relevant research, learning, best practice and technical guidance on thin surface treatments and road-user safety with members.
View source
×
AI-generated summary
Paul David RANSOM · 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
Paul David Ransom died on 24 May 2023 after losing control of his motorcycle on the A272 and colliding with a lorry. The road had received a thin surface treatment less than six hours earlier, and the slippery surface caused or substantially contributed to the collision; concerns were raised about reduced and unpredictable friction during the treatment’s early life, particularly for motorcycles, without guidance requiring warning signage.
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. The report was sent to Association of Directors of Environment, Economy, Planning and Transport; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Lack of guidance on signage following application of thin surface treatments
Wider context from the report “The resurfacing that had been carried out was an asphalt preservation treatment known as a “thin surface treatment” wherein a bituminous solution is cold sprayed onto the surface, overlaid with a silicate grit. This is a commonly used method. I heard evidence that in the initial period after laying thin surface treatment has a particular property (“early life effects”) in dry conditions the level of friction available can be akin to that of a wet road. There is no guidance that signage be provided. There is also the potential for unpredictable vehicle behaviour, particularly at lower speeds or when road surface temperatures are high, by reason of a change in the level of friction available to a vehicle during a steering manoeuvre or braking. This may have a greater effect on motorcycles.
The newly applied surface looks like an ordinary tarmac road albeit pristine.
There has been research into accident rates following application of thin surface treatments. The research had the effect of allaying concerns but I was informed that the research may not have been able to look specifically at motorcycle accidents, and further informed that the issue of signage has been the subject of discussion in at least some highways authorities . Thin surface treatments are to be distinguished from surface dressing wherein aggregates are applied, following which loose chipping warning signs are usually erected and a reduced speed limit applied for the days following application.
Following thin surface treatment the drivers of vehicles, including motorcycles are likely to assume that in dry conditions the road surface is going to have the same properties as any established dry asphalt road surface.
I am concerned that where the road is, for example, downhill and/or twisting and/or with limited sight lines it may be a particular problem if speeds are not adapted for the early life properties of thin surface treatments: particularly in the case of motorcycles.
I recommend review of actions to be taken for the safety of road users, particularly motorcycles, following application of thin surface treatments, during the early life phase following thin surface treatment.
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Association of Directors of Environment, Economy, Planning and Transport; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure to adapt vehicle speeds to the early-life properties of thin surface treatments
Wider context from the report “The resurfacing that had been carried out was an asphalt preservation treatment known as a “thin surface treatment” wherein a bituminous solution is cold sprayed onto the surface, overlaid with a silicate grit. This is a commonly used method. I heard evidence that in the initial period after laying thin surface treatment has a particular property (“early life effects”) in dry conditions the level of friction available can be akin to that of a wet road. There is no guidance that signage be provided. There is also the potential for unpredictable vehicle behaviour, particularly at lower speeds or when road surface temperatures are high, by reason of a change in the level of friction available to a vehicle during a steering manoeuvre or braking. This may have a greater effect on motorcycles.
The newly applied surface looks like an ordinary tarmac road albeit pristine.
There has been research into accident rates following application of thin surface treatments. The research had the effect of allaying concerns but I was informed that the research may not have been able to look specifically at motorcycle accidents, and further informed that the issue of signage has been the subject of discussion in at least some highways authorities. Thin surface treatments are to be distinguished from surface dressing wherein aggregates are applied, following which loose chipping warning signs are usually erected and a reduced speed limit applied for the days following application.
Following thin surface treatment the drivers of vehicles, including motorcycles are likely to assume that in dry conditions the road surface is going to have the same properties as any established dry asphalt road surface.
I am concerned that where the road is, for example, downhill and/or twisting and/or with limited sight lines it may be a particular problem if speeds are not adapted for the early life properties of thin surface treatments: particularly in the case of motorcycles.
I recommend review of actions to be taken for the safety of road users, particularly motorcycles, following application of thin surface treatments, during the early life phase following thin surface treatment.
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Association of Directors of Environment, Economy, Planning and Transport; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Unpredictable vehicle behaviour from reduced or changing friction during the early life of thin surface treatments
Wider context from the report “The resurfacing that had been carried out was an asphalt preservation treatment known as a “thin surface treatment” wherein a bituminous solution is cold sprayed onto the surface, overlaid with a silicate grit. This is a commonly used method. I heard evidence that in the initial period after laying thin surface treatment has a particular property (“early life effects”) in dry conditions the level of friction available can be akin to that of a wet road. There is no guidance that signage be provided. There is also the potential for unpredictable vehicle behaviour, particularly at lower speeds or when road surface temperatures are high, by reason of a change in the level of friction available to a vehicle during a steering manoeuvre or braking. This may have a greater effect on motorcycles.
The newly applied surface looks like an ordinary tarmac road albeit pristine.
There has been research into accident rates following application of thin surface treatments. The research had the effect of allaying concerns but I was informed that the research may not have been able to look specifically at motorcycle accidents, and further informed that the issue of signage has been the subject of discussion in at least some highways authorities. Thin surface treatments are to be distinguished from surface dressing wherein aggregates are applied, following which loose chipping warning signs are usually erected and a reduced speed limit applied for the days following application.
Following thin surface treatment the drivers of vehicles, including motorcycles are likely to assume that in dry conditions the road surface is going to have the same properties as any established dry asphalt road surface.
I am concerned that where the road is, for example, downhill and/or twisting and/or with limited sight lines it may be a particular problem if speeds are not adapted for the early life properties of thin surface treatments: particularly in the case of motorcycles.
I recommend review of actions to be taken for the safety of road users, particularly motorcycles, following application of thin surface treatments, during the early life phase following thin surface treatment.
” 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 Share relevant research, learning, best practice and technical guidance on thin surface treatments and road-user safety with members.
Verbatim wording from the response “Whilst we are not aware of the research you referenced in the report, as a member organisation we will commit to working with the Department for Transport and industry experts such as the RSTA. We will share with our members any relevant research, learning, best practice and technical guidance relating to the application of thin surface treatments and safety of road users. ADEPT is” Source location Response from Association of Directors of Environment, Economy, Planning & Transport
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 Research and road-user safety issues concerning thin surface treatments should be addressed by the Department for Transport and the Road Surface Treatments Association.
Verbatim wording from the response “We note that your report has also been addressed to ████████ Minister for the Future of Roads, Department for Transport (DfT) and The Road Surface Treatments Association (RSTA). It is appropriate that these organisations address the matters of concern, namely around the issues relating to any research and safety of road users, following application of thin surface treatments.” Source location Response from Association of Directors of Environment, Economy, Planning & Transport
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 Individual councils’ highways maintenance contractual requirements and specifications, and enforcement activities, fall outside the association’s remit.
Verbatim wording from the response “Whilst the association does not have a direct role in the design, specification, safety testing or the execution of road surface treatments, we regularly collaborate with the RSTA and provide technical commentary on their work. We do not engage with or comment on individual councils’ highways maintenance contractual requirements / specifications nor do we act as an enforcement body in any way.” Source location Response from Association of Directors of Environment, Economy, Planning & Transport
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 Design, specification, safety testing and execution of road surface treatments fall outside the association’s direct role.
Verbatim wording from the response “Whilst the association does not have a direct role in the design, specification, safety testing or the execution of road surface treatments, we regularly collaborate with the RSTA and provide technical commentary on their work. We do not engage with or comment on individual councils’ highways maintenance contractual requirements / specifications nor do we act as an enforcement body in any way.” Source location Response from Association of Directors of Environment, Economy, Planning & Transport
Open published response
Pin
Request correction
Information checked against published PFD reports and official responses · Data reviewed 7 Sep 2026 · About data quality and limitations