29 Sep 2023 John Frederick WRIGLEY · Prevention of Future Deaths report Derby and Derbyshire
View report summary
Concerns raised 2 Failure to adequately assess and provide additional energy-dissipating protection in front of the tyre barrier View source Insufficient assessment of wet-weather risks when deciding whether to allow racing View source
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
×
AI-generated summary
John Frederick WRIGLEY · 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
John Wrigley died after his kart left the track during a qualifying session on 3 May 2021, crossed wet grass and struck a lorry tyre wall at high speed. The report raised concerns that additional energy-absorbing protection was available but not used, and that insufficient regard was given to wet grass and wet-weather risks when deciding whether racing should proceed.
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 Motorsport UK Association Limited; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure to adequately assess and provide additional energy-dissipating protection in front of the tyre barrier
Wider context from the report “1. The lorry tyre boundary wall remained in position on impact, moving only a few millimetres backwards; it did not absorb enough energy to slow the velocity of the kart . The lorry tyre barrier did dissipate energy; evidence provided by those investigating the circumstances indicated that the primary function of the tyre barrier is to protect what lies outside the track e.g spectators and to contain the vehicle within the confines of the track.
Energy dissipating or impact absorbing protection such as Airfence/Recticel - a closed cell barrier - was available to be placed in front of the tyre barrier but was not utilised ; the view was that shallow angle contact with a closed cell foam barrier would result in ‘pocketing’ i.e. cause injury rather than mitigate a head injury.
Super karts are not fitted with safety belts. This aspect, racer error and an inability to control the kart following such an error and loss of control was not taken into account when decisions were made regarding the placement of additional impact absorbing protection .
Urgent action is required to review what additional type of energy dissipating or impact absorbing protection (e.g Airfence/Recticel) should be placed in front of the tyre barrier, where and in which circumstances . All risks, no matter how minimal, should be taken into account.
Additional protection was available but not used. It may have reduced the potential severity of such an incident and prevented the death of a competitor or racer.
” 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 Motorsport UK Association Limited; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Insufficient assessment of wet-weather risks when deciding whether to allow racing
Wider context from the report “2. It had been raining and although water was not pooling on the track (which would have been a visible indicator to consider stopping racing on safety grounds) the grass area adjacent to the track was wet such that when Mr Wrigley left the track and moved onto the grass, the wet grass caused his kart to accelerate and collide with the tyre wall.
Insufficient regard was given to the fact that the grass was wet when deciding if competitors should be allowed to use the track . Racer error and an inability to control the kart following such an error and loss of control onto grass was not taken into account when decisions were made regarding the use of the track by competitors . Urgent action is required to review the risk assessment of whether to start or stop a race due to wet weather .
” Open source report
×
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 Wet grass does not justify abandoning competition, because grass can be wet in varied conditions and wet-weather sport is practicable in the UK.
Verbatim wording from the response “13. Of concern however is the premise of the comment at paragraph 5.2 because it suggests at one possible level that whenever grass is wet competition should be abandoned. However, grass may be ‘wet’ for any number of reasons, even in otherwise dry weather depending on the time of year, including when freshly cut or dewed. At” Source location Response from Motorsport UK Association Limited
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 Wet grass cannot accelerate a kart; it may only reduce retardation compared with drier surfaces.
Verbatim wording from the response “11. Regarding HMC’s observations at paragraph 5.2 of the Report, we note HMC’s comments regarding features between the track and barriers, in particular in this case wet grass. We unavoidably but respectfully comment that HMC’s averment that ‘.. wet grass caused his kart to accelerate and collide ...’ is simply, and scientifically wrong. The fact of the grass being wet could not cause the kart to accelerate without additional force being applied to the kart. Its retardation qualities may be reduced compared, for example, to dry grass or some other surface, but it cannot cause objects to accelerate.” Source location Response from Motorsport UK Association Limited
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 Mandatory wet-weather risk assessments by trained, licensed event officials mean no further action is required.
Verbatim wording from the response “12. HMC’s comments regarding risk assessment in wet weather is noted, however that is already undertaken by highly trained and licenced officials at each Event as stated in Evidence at the First Hearing. As those assessments are already a mandatory part of Regulated motorsport, no further action is required.” Source location Response from Motorsport UK Association Limited
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 Existing barrier placement was appropriate, and Recticel-type barriers are unsuitable on straights because of pocketing risks.
Verbatim wording from the response “5. All circuits Licenced for Regulated motor sport by the Statutorily recognised authorised bodies - Motorsport UK and the AutoCycle Union (“ACU”) in this case - rigorously apply the application of and requirement for appropriate barriers to be positioned at relevant locations and the types of which depend on the various track features (simply expressed as straights or corners).” Source location Response from Motorsport UK Association Limited
Open published response
16 Dec 2022 Zef Max EISENBERG · Prevention of Future Deaths report North Yorkshire and York
View report summary
Concerns raised 1 Inadequate regulation and assessment of car strength at harness and reinforcement-plate attachment points View source
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
Zef Max EISENBERG · 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
Zef Max Eisenberg died at Elvington Airfield, York, after losing control of a motor car travelling at approximately 244mph during a National Speed Record attempt. The principal concern was the regulation and assessment of the strength of cars where safety harnesses and reinforcement plates are fitted, after the harness crotch straps detached when the car overturned.
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 Motorsport UK Association Limited; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Inadequate regulation and assessment of car strength at harness and reinforcement-plate attachment points
Wider context from the report “The reinforcement plate complied with FIA regulations.
The detachment of crotch strap harness in this instance cannot be said to have made a significant difference to the manner in which the driver died.
My concern relates to the regulation and assessment of the strength of cars at the point the harness and the reinforcement plates are fitted.
” Open source report
18 Mar 2022 Emiliano Raul Sala · Prevention of Future Deaths report Dorset
View report summary
Concerns raised 4 Risk of future deaths from illegal flights View source Failure of relevant organisations to communicate illegal-flight risks to their members View source Insufficient CAA powers for investigating and enforcing aviation regulation breaches View source Lack of effective public guidance about illegal flights and their risks View source See 1 more concern
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
×
AI-generated summary
Emiliano Raul Sala · 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
Emiliano Raul Sala was a passenger on a flight from Nantes to Cardiff on 21 January 2019 when the aircraft crashed into the sea. He died from fatal head and trunk injuries; the flight was an unauthorised commercial operation. The report raised concerns about illegal flights, their safety risks, and limitations on the Civil Aviation Authority’s investigative and enforcement powers.
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 Motorsport UK Association Limited; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Risk of future deaths from illegal flights
Wider context from the report “2. I have concerns with regard to the following:
i. There could be future deaths as a result of these illegal flights , and I request that the Secretary of State for Transport conducts a review of the powers available to the CAA in investigating breaches of aviation regulations. I request that the Secretary of State for Transport consider meeting with the CAA to establish what powers they would find of assistance in their investigative and enforcement role.
ii. I further request that a review is undertaken by the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport of the guidance given to the general public, especially all those involved in the sporting and music worlds, about the illegality of these flights and the risks associated with them. I would again request that consideration be given to meeting with the CAA who can properly advise on the risks associated with these flights, especially of future deaths that can occur and what support may assist them in deterring people from using these flights.
iii. I would request that all the organisations identified at numbers 3-20 in the list at the beginning of this report, consider cascading to all their members, and anyone else they consider will benefit from the information, the illegality of these flights and the risks associated with them, especially of a future death, in order to discourage the use of these flights. I would again request that consideration be given to liaising with the CAA who can properly advise on the risks and what support would be of benefit to reduce the use of these flights and prevent future deaths.
” 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 Motorsport UK Association Limited; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure of relevant organisations to communicate illegal-flight risks to their members
Wider context from the report “2. I have concerns with regard to the following:
i. There could be future deaths as a result of these illegal flights, and I request that the Secretary of State for Transport conducts a review of the powers available to the CAA in investigating breaches of aviation regulations. I request that the Secretary of State for Transport consider meeting with the CAA to establish what powers they would find of assistance in their investigative and enforcement role.
ii. I further request that a review is undertaken by the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport of the guidance given to the general public, especially all those involved in the sporting and music worlds, about the illegality of these flights and the risks associated with them. I would again request that consideration be given to meeting with the CAA who can properly advise on the risks associated with these flights, especially of future deaths that can occur and what support may assist them in deterring people from using these flights.
iii. I would request that all the organisations identified at numbers 3-20 in the list at the beginning of this report, consider cascading to all their members , and anyone else they consider will benefit from the information, the illegality of these flights and the risks associated with them, especially of a future death, in order to discourage the use of these flights. I would again request that consideration be given to liaising with the CAA who can properly advise on the risks and what support would be of benefit to reduce the use of these flights and prevent future deaths.
” 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 Motorsport UK Association Limited; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Insufficient CAA powers for investigating and enforcing aviation regulation breaches
Wider context from the report “2. I have concerns with regard to the following:
i. There could be future deaths as a result of these illegal flights, and I request that the Secretary of State for Transport conducts a review of the powers available to the CAA in investigating breaches of aviation regulations . I request that the Secretary of State for Transport consider meeting with the CAA to establish what powers they would find of assistance in their investigative and enforcement role .
ii. I further request that a review is undertaken by the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport of the guidance given to the general public, especially all those involved in the sporting and music worlds, about the illegality of these flights and the risks associated with them. I would again request that consideration be given to meeting with the CAA who can properly advise on the risks associated with these flights, especially of future deaths that can occur and what support may assist them in deterring people from using these flights.
iii. I would request that all the organisations identified at numbers 3-20 in the list at the beginning of this report, consider cascading to all their members, and anyone else they consider will benefit from the information, the illegality of these flights and the risks associated with them, especially of a future death, in order to discourage the use of these flights. I would again request that consideration be given to liaising with the CAA who can properly advise on the risks and what support would be of benefit to reduce the use of these flights and prevent future deaths.
” 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 Motorsport UK Association Limited; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Lack of effective public guidance about illegal flights and their risks
Wider context from the report “2. I have concerns with regard to the following:
i. There could be future deaths as a result of these illegal flights, and I request that the Secretary of State for Transport conducts a review of the powers available to the CAA in investigating breaches of aviation regulations. I request that the Secretary of State for Transport consider meeting with the CAA to establish what powers they would find of assistance in their investigative and enforcement role.
ii. I further request that a review is undertaken by the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport of the guidance given to the general public , especially all those involved in the sporting and music worlds, about the illegality of these flights and the risks associated with them . I would again request that consideration be given to meeting with the CAA who can properly advise on the risks associated with these flights, especially of future deaths that can occur and what support may assist them in deterring people from using these flights.
iii. I would request that all the organisations identified at numbers 3-20 in the list at the beginning of this report, consider cascading to all their members, and anyone else they consider will benefit from the information, the illegality of these flights and the risks associated with them, especially of a future death, in order to discourage the use of these flights. I would again request that consideration be given to liaising with the CAA who can properly advise on the risks and what support would be of benefit to reduce the use of these flights and prevent future deaths.
” 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 Publish advice to license holders through the website and monthly ezine on privately chartered aircraft airworthiness, pilot qualification checks, and referring concerns to the CAA.
Verbatim wording from the response “In light of the Report, the ASN will so soon as practicable publish advice to its License holders by means of clear notice on its website and in its monthly ezine ‘Revolution’ relating to and drawing attention to the concerns raised by the Report regarding air-worthiness of privately chartered aircraft and the qualifications verification of pilots contracted to provide the services together with recommendation to refer to the CAA in the event of any doubt or concerns.” Source location Response from Motorsport UK
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