PFD report

Beverley Lawford John Siddall · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 24 May 2016•Cornwall

Report record

Published report and response evidence

This page connects the concerns raised in this report with statements found in recipients’ published responses. A link shows a clear evidence connection; it does not assign responsibility.

View original report
Concerns
2

Raised in this report

Recipients
1

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 1 recipient

Stated actions
3

Described in responses

Recipients and published responses

Source document

Full report text

This is the full text from the original published report.

Open published report

Concerns and recipient responses

Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

Concerns raised2

  1. Inadequacy of the road layout at the collision location
    Part of recurring concern: Inadequate control of recurring collision risks at hazardous road locationsPart of recurring concern: Unsafe road design and layout
  2. Inadequacy of safety notices or barriers at the collision location
    Part of recurring concern: Inadequate control of recurring collision risks at hazardous road locations
Responses linked to these concerns

Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.

Actions described in response An action is something a recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to a concern raised.1

  1. Action

    Maintain the local safety scheme’s large yellow-backed chevrons, widened carriageway and bend hatching.

    Stated by Cornwall CouncilStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 24 May 2016.

Respondent positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when it does not describe a specific action.2

  1. Position

    Solid restraints may cause more injuries than they prevent by increasing impact severity or redirecting vehicles into oncoming traffic.

    Stated by Cornwall CouncilDisputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Inadequacy of the road layout at the collision location

Wider context from the report

“That two witnesses to the traffic collision noted in evidence that they had seen evidence of a good number of cars leaving the A3075 road at Cosy Cottage, Perranwell at the same point as Mr Siddall. The police Collision Investigator at inquest, noted when he went to survey the scene there was another car present that had come off the road which had nothing to do with Mr Siddall’s collision. There was concern at inquest that the road layout, or safety notices and/or barriers in place, were not adequate and that this section of road should be reviewed with the view to reducing the risk of cars leaving the road at this point. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Inadequate control of recurring collision risks at hazardous road locations; Unsafe road design and layout.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Inadequacy of safety notices or barriers at the collision location

Wider context from the report

“That two witnesses to the traffic collision noted in evidence that they had seen evidence of a good number of cars leaving the A3075 road at Cosy Cottage, Perranwell at the same point as Mr Siddall. The police Collision Investigator at inquest, noted when he went to survey the scene there was another car present that had come off the road which had nothing to do with Mr Siddall’s collision. There was concern at inquest that the road layout, or safety notices and/or barriers in place, were not adequate and that this section of road should be reviewed with the view to reducing the risk of cars leaving the road at this point. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Inadequate control of recurring collision risks at hazardous road locations.

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 the local safety scheme’s large yellow-backed chevrons, widened carriageway and bend hatching.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In 2003/4 the council carried out a Local Safety Scheme on this bend, erecting large yellow-backed chevrons and widening and hatching the bend. This has proven to be very effective in terms of the accident record, and the bend has not been on the Council’s list of accident cluster sites since this work was undertaken. In recent years the speed limit has also been reduced to 40mph (from 60mph), although this is somewhat academic given the nature of the corner. There is little further that could be done to ensure drivers are aware of the severity of the bend, and to help them remain on the road.”

Source location

Response from Cornwall Council
Page 2 · response
Published 24 May 2016

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

Solid restraints may cause more injuries than they prevent by increasing impact severity or redirecting vehicles into oncoming traffic.

Verbatim wording from the response

“After careful consideration of the facts resulting from our investigations, advice from the Council’s lead Road Safety Auditor, the content of your report and the geometry of this particular highway, the Council has concluded that any works at this site such as crash barriers or Cornish hedging are as likely to cause injury to occupants of any vehicle that fails to negotiate the bends as to protect them from it. We note that in this instance the head injuries to Mr Siddall resulted partly from his failure to wear a seat belt rather than from an excessively violent impact. Indeed, the impact itself was relatively minor and Mr Siddall’s vehicle continued to drive over the field largely undamaged until it came to rest at the stream.”

Source location

Response from Cornwall Council
Page 1 · response
Published 24 May 2016

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 chevrons, bend widening, hatching and the reduced speed limit have improved safety, leaving little further to do.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In 2003/4 the council carried out a Local Safety Scheme on this bend, erecting large yellow-backed chevrons and widening and hatching the bend. This has proven to be very effective in terms of the accident record, and the bend has not been on the Council’s list of accident cluster sites since this work was undertaken. In recent years the speed limit has also been reduced to 40mph (from 60mph), although this is somewhat academic given the nature of the corner. There is little further that could be done to ensure drivers are aware of the severity of the bend, and to help them remain on the road.”

Source location

Response from Cornwall Council
Page 2 · response
Published 24 May 2016

Open published response

Other statements in published responses

These actions and other statements could not be clearly connected to one concern in this report.

Recipient-stated actions An action is something a recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to a concern raised.2

  1. 1

    Continue monitoring the site and comparable locations in conjunction with the police.

    Stated by Cornwall CouncilStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 24 May 2016.
  2. 2

    Maintain the reduced 40 mph speed limit at the bend.

    Stated by Cornwall CouncilStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 24 May 2016.

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

Continue monitoring the site and comparable locations in conjunction with the police.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In light of the above, therefore, the Council does not believe it is suitable to introduce solid restraints to the outside of the bend. The Council will, however, continue to monitor the site and others like it in conjunction with the police.”

Source location

Response from Cornwall Council
Page 2 · response
Published 24 May 2016

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

Maintain the reduced 40 mph speed limit at the bend.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In 2003/4 the council carried out a Local Safety Scheme on this bend, erecting large yellow-backed chevrons and widening and hatching the bend. This has proven to be very effective in terms of the accident record, and the bend has not been on the Council’s list of accident cluster sites since this work was undertaken. In recent years the speed limit has also been reduced to 40mph (from 60mph), although this is somewhat academic given the nature of the corner. There is little further that could be done to ensure drivers are aware of the severity of the bend, and to help them remain on the road.”

Source location

Response from Cornwall Council
Page 2 · response
Published 24 May 2016

Open published response
Back to top

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

Data last updated 7 September 2026