PFD report

BRADLEY MARK HARRY HOOPER · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 20 Jul 2015•Central Hampshire

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
2

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 2 recipients

Stated actions
6

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. Failure to allocate inexperienced and younger marshals to low-risk positions
  2. Lack of appropriate smartphone-use warnings in marshal briefings
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.2

  1. Action

    Allocate experienced marshals to high-risk points and less experienced marshals to low-risk points using the designated course map.

    Stated by Portsmouth Motocross ClubStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 20 July 2015.
  2. Action

    Prohibit marshal mobile-phone use while motorcycles are circulating and require marshals to face away from oncoming motorcycles.

    Stated by Portsmouth Motocross ClubStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 20 July 2015.

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

Failure to allocate inexperienced and younger marshals to low-risk positions

Wider context from the report

“2. The marshall at Point 11 was aged 16 at the time of the incident and had only marshalled on one previous occasion. Although he claimed to have made this known to the Chief Marshall no action was taken to allocate him to a low risk position, notwithstanding the current club marshalling rules of Portsmouth Motocross Club which states that those aged 16-18 should be so allocated. Portsmouth Motocross Club should ensure that marshalls are allocated to positions based on the experience of each individual and that it should review its rules in light of the MCF Code of Practice (once that is updated) and its affiliation to MCF. ”

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

Lack of appropriate smartphone-use warnings in marshal briefings

Wider context from the report

“1. The evidence showed that the marshall at Point 11 had earlier been using his mobile phone to take photographs of passing riders and at the time of the incident was facing in the opposite direction to the direction of travel of the riders, so that he was unaware of Bradley Hooper coming off his machine and did not show a yellow flag until after the fatal collision. The MCF Code of Practice makes no reference to appropriate warnings which should be given to marshalls at briefings about the use of smartphones whilst practices or races are under way. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

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

Allocate experienced marshals to high-risk points and less experienced marshals to low-risk points using the designated course map.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• Experienced Marshals (with 6 or more sessions of Marshalling history) are placed on “high-risk” Marshal Points.”

Source location

2015-0285-Response-by-Portsmouth-Motocross-Club
Page 1 · response
Published 20 July 2015

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

Prohibit marshal mobile-phone use while motorcycles are circulating and require marshals to face away from oncoming motorcycles.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• ALL Marshals are informed that they are not to use mobile telephones on the Marshal Point when motorbikes are on the course circuit.”

Source location

2015-0285-Response-by-Portsmouth-Motocross-Club
Page 2 · response
Published 20 July 2015

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.4

  1. 1

    Deploy additional floating marshals at circuit locations to check that point marshals are acting correctly.

    Stated by Portsmouth Motocross ClubStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 20 July 2015.
  2. 2

    Implement and disseminate updated Rules of Marshalling by reading them out, including them in marshal briefings, and handing them to marshals.

    Stated by Portsmouth Motocross ClubStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 20 July 2015.
  3. 3

    Brief every marshal before allocation, verify understanding, and prevent signing or deployment when a marshal is unsure of the rules.

    Stated by Portsmouth Motocross ClubStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 20 July 2015.
  4. 4

    Instruct all marshals on the meanings and required use of each marshalling flag.

    Stated by Portsmouth Motocross ClubStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 20 July 2015.

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

Deploy additional floating marshals at circuit locations to check that point marshals are acting correctly.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• Additional “floating” Marshals will be positioned at various locations on the circuit to ensure those Marshals placed on Marshal points, are acting in the correct manner.”

Source location

2015-0285-Response-by-Portsmouth-Motocross-Club
Page 2 · response
Published 20 July 2015

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

Implement and disseminate updated Rules of Marshalling by reading them out, including them in marshal briefings, and handing them to marshals.

Verbatim wording from the response

“I have attached the updated Rules of Marshalling, which is read out at every race meeting, in the Marshals Brief, and also handed out to each individual Marshal allocated to a Marshal Point on the day of the event.”

Source location

2015-0285-Response-by-Portsmouth-Motocross-Club
Page 1 · response
Published 20 July 2015

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

Brief every marshal before allocation, verify understanding, and prevent signing or deployment when a marshal is unsure of the rules.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• All Marshals are briefed before going to their allocated Marshal Point, and ALL Marshals are asked if they understand the Rules of Marshalling before they are permitted onto a Marshal Point.”

Source location

2015-0285-Response-by-Portsmouth-Motocross-Club
Page 1 · response
Published 20 July 2015

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

Instruct all marshals on the meanings and required use of each marshalling flag.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• ALL Marshals are instructed what each marshalling flag is to be used for:”

Source location

2015-0285-Response-by-Portsmouth-Motocross-Club
Page 2 · response
Published 20 July 2015

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