1 Apr 2022 Corrie McKeague · Prevention of Future Deaths report Suffolk
View report summary
Concerns raised 5 Failure of bin locks to prevent individuals entering bins View source Lack of automated recognition of unusually heavy bins View source Failure to provide and safety-check equipment for thorough and safe bin searches View source Failure of lorry viewing apertures to provide usable hopper visibility View source Failure of compaction processes to allow hopper inspection before compaction View source See 2 more concerns
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
No linked response statements No action or position from this recipient is clearly linked to the concerns in this report.
×
AI-generated summary
Corrie McKeague · 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
Corrie McKeague disappeared in Bury St Edmunds on 24 September 2016 after entering a commercial waste-bin area, and was later determined to have died in the back of a refuse lorry. The inquest identified concerns including ineffective bin locks and bin searches, lack of safe search equipment for drivers, and poor visibility through the lorry’s viewing window.
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 Container Handling Equipment Manufacturers Association; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure of bin locks to prevent individuals entering bins
Wider context from the report “1. Ineffective bin locks.
The court heard that bin locks were designed to keep waste within the bin, keep inclement weather out, but were not designed to keep individuals out . The locks were described as not robust, and a determined or strong individual would get in . Due to their design the locks were also frequently broken .
Stronger locks (such as snap locks) had been considered, but due to the risk of entombing (an individual inadvertently becoming locked inside a bin) stronger locks had been discounted. However, the choir heard there are currently no stronger bin locks available which would allow an individual to open them from the inside should they become entombed in a bin.
There were 740 reported incidents of people in bins over a 6-year period (i.e. 10 per week), which are likely to be reduced if stronger locks are fitted.
” 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 Container Handling Equipment Manufacturers Association; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Lack of automated recognition of unusually heavy bins
Wider context from the report “2. Ineffective search of the bin.
Despite the lifting mechanism recording the weight of each bin every time it is lifted, there is no automated/digital system to recognise when a bin is significantly heavier than it usually is .
In this case the usual weight in the bin (based on an average of 13 previous collections) was approximately 15kgs. The bin weight recorded by the lifting mechanism on the dust cart was 116kgs. Such a significant difference in weight of a particular bin, is something that should be recognisable and should warrant a further check being completed .
” 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 Container Handling Equipment Manufacturers Association; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure to provide and safety-check equipment for thorough and safe bin searches
Wider context from the report “3. Any driver not having the means to search the bin thoroughly or safely .
The court heard that drivers are now told to use a ‘push stick’ to allow a more thorough search of the contents of a bin. This instruction was not in place at the time of this incident.
However, it was not clear from the evidence if the push stick is an identifiable piece of equipment on every vehicle , or if it is deemed as a piece of safety equipment, and therefore included in the daily safety checks of the vehicle .
” 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 Container Handling Equipment Manufacturers Association; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure of lorry viewing apertures to provide usable hopper visibility
Wider context from the report “4. Poor visibility through the Perspex viewing window on the lorry
In relation to the poor visibility through the Perspex viewing aperture/window on the lorry two factors were identified:
Firstly, it is physically impossible to undertake a check of the hopper mechanism on the Biffa lorry as the viewing aperture window is too high for this to be achieved by an average height driver .
Secondly, on the six-year-old vehicle in question the Perspex had become opaque .
A Detective Constable who had watched the lifting process to provide evidence of its operation for the court, described the driver as standing on tiptoes to try a check the vehicle hopper, whilst peering around the wing of the lifting mechanism. When asked specifically about the viewing window the officer said it was too high to see through and opaque. The officer told the court the viewing aperture was ‘totally useless’ as a means of checking what was being loaded into the hopper .
Whilst viewing the hopper is impossible on the current vehicle, it renders the instruction for drivers to view the hopper prior to compaction (contained in the Biffa Operating Instructions for Trade Waste Vehicles) impossible to achieve.
In addition, the automatic nature of the compaction process, also makes adherence to the Operating Instructions impossible on some vehicles, as compaction starts immediately the bin is tipped.
” 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 Container Handling Equipment Manufacturers Association; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure of compaction processes to allow hopper inspection before compaction
Wider context from the report “4. Poor visibility through the Perspex viewing window on the lorry
In relation to the poor visibility through the Perspex viewing aperture/window on the lorry two factors were identified:
Firstly, it is physically impossible to undertake a check of the hopper mechanism on the Biffa lorry as the viewing aperture window is too high for this to be achieved by an average height driver.
Secondly, on the six-year-old vehicle in question the Perspex had become opaque.
A Detective Constable who had watched the lifting process to provide evidence of its operation for the court, described the driver as standing on tiptoes to try a check the vehicle hopper, whilst peering around the wing of the lifting mechanism. When asked specifically about the viewing window the officer said it was too high to see through and opaque. The officer told the court the viewing aperture was ‘totally useless’ as a means of checking what was being loaded into the hopper.
Whilst viewing the hopper is impossible on the current vehicle, it renders the instruction for drivers to view the hopper prior to compaction (contained in the Biffa Operating Instructions for Trade Waste Vehicles) impossible to achieve.
In addition, the automatic nature of the compaction process, also makes adherence to the Operating Instructions impossible on some vehicles , as compaction starts immediately the bin is tipped .
” Open source report
Pin
Request correction
Information checked against published PFD reports and official responses · Data reviewed 7 Sep 2026 · About data quality and limitations