PFD report

Gary Ronald Sloan · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 22 Jan 2020•Sunderland

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
4

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. Concentration of road traffic collisions on the A690 section between High Lane and A182
  2. Recurrent fatal road traffic collisions at the exact location of the same tree
    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.3

  1. Action

    Complete a road safety scheme at the High Lane–A690 junction.

    Stated by Sunderland City CouncilStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 8 February 2020.
  2. Action

    Include a vehicle restraint scheme for the location in the 2020–2021 capital programme.

    Stated by Sunderland City CouncilStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 8 February 2020.
  3. Action

    Introduce an order banning U-turns along the relevant length of the A690.

    Stated by Sunderland City CouncilStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 8 February 2020.

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

Concentration of road traffic collisions on the A690 section between High Lane and A182

Wider context from the report

“Following the Police Road Traffic Collision Report, I heard evidence that there were 15 slight injury, 4 serious injury and 2 fatal (including this incident) road traffic collisions on the A690 between the junction with High Lane to the East and A182 to the West between 31st October 2014 and 31st October 2019. Although this section of the A690 does not automatically qualify for the installation of a safety road restriction system, as this was the second fatal road traffic collision at the exact location and the same tree, the decision may need to be reviewed together with a reassessment of the drainage and clearance of surface water schedule. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

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

Recurrent fatal road traffic collisions at the exact location of the same tree

Wider context from the report

“Following the Police Road Traffic Collision Report, I heard evidence that there were 15 slight injury, 4 serious injury and 2 fatal (including this incident) road traffic collisions on the A690 between the junction with High Lane to the East and A182 to the West between 31st October 2014 and 31st October 2019. Although this section of the A690 does not automatically qualify for the installation of a safety road restriction system, as this was the second fatal road traffic collision at the exact location and the same tree, the decision may need to be reviewed together with a reassessment of the drainage and clearance of surface water schedule. ”

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

Complete a road safety scheme at the High Lane–A690 junction.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In terms of the stretch of road in question, the council takes its responsibilities for road safety seriously and as such in 2016 a road safety scheme was completed at the High Lane-A690 Junction which has since resulted in a reduction in accidents. In addition, the council has recently introduced an order which bans U turns along this length of the A690 to reduce the risk of unnecessary vehicle conflict, plans of which are attached for your records.”

Source location

2020-0009-Response-from-Sunderland-City-Council-Redacted
Page 1 · response
Published 8 February 2020

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

Include a vehicle restraint scheme for the location in the 2020–2021 capital programme.

Verbatim wording from the response

“I note your acceptance that this section of road would be considered low risk when determining the installation of a Vehicle Restraint System, however I can state that the council will look to include a scheme in its 2020-2021 capital programme which will mitigate the risk of serious injury to drivers at this location.”

Source location

2020-0009-Response-from-Sunderland-City-Council-Redacted
Page 1 · response
Published 8 February 2020

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

Introduce an order banning U-turns along the relevant length of the A690.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In terms of the stretch of road in question, the council takes its responsibilities for road safety seriously and as such in 2016 a road safety scheme was completed at the High Lane-A690 Junction which has since resulted in a reduction in accidents. In addition, the council has recently introduced an order which bans U turns along this length of the A690 to reduce the risk of unnecessary vehicle conflict, plans of which are attached for your records.”

Source location

2020-0009-Response-from-Sunderland-City-Council-Redacted
Page 1 · response
Published 8 February 2020

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.1

  1. 1

    Replace the side-entry gully near the incident with a top-entry gully in spring.

    Stated by Sunderland City CouncilStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 8 February 2020.

Recipient positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when they do not describe a specific action.1

  1. 1

    The existing frequency of gully cleaning was considered appropriate to address the drainage concern.

    Stated by Sunderland City CouncilExisting arrangements considered sufficientThe respondent said that existing arrangements were sufficient, so no further action was needed.

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

Replace the side-entry gully near the incident with a top-entry gully in spring.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In answering your drainage concerns I would say that the frequency of gully cleaning was appropriate and would also confirm that the side entry gully, nearby to the incident, will be replaced with a top entry gully in the spring. For your records I have enclosed a plan showing the location of the proposed gully.”

Source location

2020-0009-Response-from-Sunderland-City-Council-Redacted
Page 1 · response
Published 8 February 2020

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 existing frequency of gully cleaning was considered appropriate to address the drainage concern.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In answering your drainage concerns I would say that the frequency of gully cleaning was appropriate and would also confirm that the side entry gully, nearby to the incident, will be replaced with a top entry gully in the spring. For your records I have enclosed a plan showing the location of the proposed gully.”

Source location

2020-0009-Response-from-Sunderland-City-Council-Redacted
Page 1 · response
Published 8 February 2020

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