Recipient

Volvo Group UK LimitedIncludes reports addressed to a minister or senior office-holder acting for this organisation.

Pin Request correction

First report 13 Dec 2018•Latest report 13 Dec 2018

Recipient record

Reports, concerns and published responses

Private and voluntary organisations · Private limited company. This page brings together reports naming this recipient and response statements clearly connected to concerns raised in those reports.

Reports
1

Naming this recipient

Published responses
100%

Found for named reports

Concerns addressed
1

Across all linked responses

Stated actions
0

Described in responses

Reports over time

Reports over time

Reports naming this recipient by issue year.

Evidence profile

Report topics

Share of this recipient’s reports compared with all other recipients.

100%published responses found
0stated actions described

Topic comparisons are not available in the current evidence snapshot.

Concerns and recipient responses

Statements from Volvo Group UK Limited linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. Addressed to: ████████ Legal Director Volvo Group (UK) Limited.

    North Northumberland

    AI-generated summary

    Maurice Leslie Wrightson · 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

    Maurice Leslie Wrightson, a coach driver, died in France on 16 April 2013 after the brakes on his coach stopped responding during a mountain descent; the coach crashed into rocks and burst into flames. The principal concern was that Volvo vehicle manuals did not adequately explain the risks of using automatic gearbox mode during long downhill descents, creating uncertainty and a potential risk of future deaths.

    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 Volvo Group UK Limited; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of manufacturer guidance on automatic gearbox use during long downhill descents

    Wider context from the report

    “During the hearing evidence was heard that Mr Wrightson was using i-shift automatic gears while driving the coach, and a foot retarder, in addition to the normal vehicle brakes during the long mountain descent. The inquest heard from a former Depot Manager ████████ that following Mr Wrightson’s death, he checked with other coach drivers in the employment of Classic Coaches, Durham, at the time, as to their usual driving practice and found that their driving practices were equally divided. Some drivers engaged manual gears and others used automatic i-shift gears during mountain descents. Mr Shipley took the decision to instruct all drivers to use manual gears during long mountain descents. Evidence was heard that driving uphill, an automatic gear system works on the principle of climbing with a low gear initially until the vehicle gains momentum and automatically steps up to the next gear as resistance lowers and speed increases. Conversely, going downhill the use of automatic gears would have less resistance and increased momentum, causing a need for additional braking. ████████ informed the inquest that he had tried to clarify the position with Volvo as to the recommendations contained in the Vehicle Manual, which gave a clear recommendation as to the use of vehicle gears while going uphill but was silent as to any recommendation when going downhill. ████████ said that in attempting to clarify the situation with the vehicle manufacturers, the reply he received was that drivers ‘should follow the information or advice contained in the Vehicle Manual’. The manufacturers (Volvo) had not been recognised as an interested person or invited to attend the Inquest because this was a point which arose during the hearing of ████████ evidence at the Inquest itself. ████████ evidence was that the Volvo handbook wallet for the B12B and B12M produced in 2004 has a driver’s handbook, operating instructions display booklet, operating instructions EBS booklet and operating instructions I-shift gearbox booklet which gives guidance only in relation to driving up a hill and the locking gear. In respect of subsequent Volvo models the advice remains the same except that later dated manuals advise ‘caution in respect of brake fade in long descents’. There is no warning that automatic mode is likely to exacerbate brake fade in long descents (such as at Alp D’Huez). ████████ told the inquest that he would at that time, as a PCV driver himself, have done exactly the same as Maurice Wrightson and used automatic mode. The Volvo manual gives no guidance to drivers for downhill driving such that automatic gearbox mode would be selected rather than manual by most drivers. Owners and drivers are reliant on the manufacturer to supply adequate instructions on the use of these technological advancements fitted to their vehicles. The inquest does not apportion any blame or liability for the circumstances of deaths and is prevented by Sections 5 and 10 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 from doing so. However, it seems to me that the lack of information contained in the Vehicle Manual may lead to a lack of understanding or uncertainty, and there is a risk that this may lead to future deaths. ”
    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

    Automatic gearbox mode is not generally likely to exacerbate brake fade during long descents.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Having investigated your concerns thoroughly we do not support a general statement that the use of automatic gear mode is likely to exacerbate brake fade in long descents. It is true that the automatic mode and manual mode both have characteristics which can be different to each other. However these differences can be both positive and negative depending on the characteristic and the circumstance. On balance we do not feel that the differences are sufficient to issue a recommendation in the vehicle manual in favour of one gearbox mode over the other. The correct use of the retarder is much more important than the selection of manual or automatic mode on the gearbox when driving down hills and this is highlighted on page 56 of the current manual which states “Use the retarder function when driving down hills and for slow braking”.”

    Source location

    2017-0372-Response-by-Vovlo-Group-UK-Limited
    Page 1 · response
    Published 11 February 2018

    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 current manual's instruction to use the retarder when driving downhill is sufficient; no gearbox-mode recommendation is needed.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Having investigated your concerns thoroughly we do not support a general statement that the use of automatic gear mode is likely to exacerbate brake fade in long descents. It is true that the automatic mode and manual mode both have characteristics which can be different to each other. However these differences can be both positive and negative depending on the characteristic and the circumstance. On balance we do not feel that the differences are sufficient to issue a recommendation in the vehicle manual in favour of one gearbox mode over the other. The correct use of the retarder is much more important than the selection of manual or automatic mode on the gearbox when driving down hills and this is highlighted on page 56 of the current manual which states “Use the retarder function when driving down hills and for slow braking”.”

    Source location

    2017-0372-Response-by-Vovlo-Group-UK-Limited
    Page 1 · response
    Published 11 February 2018

    Open published response
Back to top

Published response patterns

Compared with other recipients in reports included in PFD Monitor

Describes published response evidence, not performance.

Published responses found

100%
100%All other recipients 58%
0%100%

How actions were described at the time

This respondent
All other recipients
47%25%27%<1%<1%
  • Completed
  • In progress
  • Planned
  • Unclear
  • Partially completed

Statuses reflect what recipients said at the time. PFD Monitor does not verify whether actions happened.

Types of action described in responses

Percentages use all actions described by each group. An action may have more than one type, so percentages do not total 100%.

Information checked against published PFD reports and official responses · Data reviewed 7 Sep 2026 · About data quality and limitations

Data last updated 7 September 2026