PFD report

Jonathan Edward Michael Sellman · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 17 Aug 2016•South Yorkshire (Western)

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. Road verges capable of launching out-of-control vehicles onto or over the Armco barrier
  2. Pooling water on the carriageway
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

    Implement dash-cam monitoring by having a design technician drive the Parkway during heavy rain.

    Stated by Rotherham Borough CouncilStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 17 August 2016.
  2. Action

    Survey the highway drainage system at the relevant location to assess its suitability.

    Stated by Rotherham Borough CouncilStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 17 August 2016.
  3. Action

    Add a drainage supervisor to monthly driven highway inspections.

    Stated by Rotherham Borough CouncilStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 17 August 2016.

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

  1. Position

    Investigations concluded that the road geometry and drainage system do not create a risk of standing water or pooling on the carriageway.

    Stated by Rotherham Borough 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

Road verges capable of launching out-of-control vehicles onto or over the Armco barrier

Wider context from the report

“(2) The state of the verges is such that a car might be pushed upwards on leaving the road out of control, landing on or over the Armco barrier. ”

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

Pooling water on the carriageway

Wider context from the report

“(1) Water appears to be pooling on the carriageway of this fast and busy road, notwithstanding that the Local Authority consider the drainage to have been broadly operative at the relevant time. ”

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

Implement dash-cam monitoring by having a design technician drive the Parkway during heavy rain.

Verbatim wording from the response

“(iv) it has purchased a dash cam and implemented a system whereby a design technician drives along the Parkway to monitor the situation during periods of heavy rain.”

Source location

2016-0395-Response-by-Rotherham-Metropolitan-Borough-Council
Page 2 · response
Published 17 August 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

Survey the highway drainage system at the relevant location to assess its suitability.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Rotherham MBC takes Mr Dorries’ concerns extremely seriously and has taken a number of steps since the accident to meet these concerns including the following:”

Source location

2016-0395-Response-by-Rotherham-Metropolitan-Borough-Council
Page 2 · response
Published 17 August 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

Add a drainage supervisor to monthly driven highway inspections.

Verbatim wording from the response

“(iii) when undertaking its regular inspections of the highway by way of monthly driven inspections, the highway inspector is now accompanied by a drainage supervisor;”

Source location

2016-0395-Response-by-Rotherham-Metropolitan-Borough-Council
Page 2 · response
Published 17 August 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

Investigations concluded that the road geometry and drainage system do not create a risk of standing water or pooling on the carriageway.

Verbatim wording from the response

“(i) the A630 was built in the 1960s and the geometry of this highway is appropriate and adheres to relevant construction standards;”

Source location

2016-0395-Response-by-Rotherham-Metropolitan-Borough-Council
Page 2 · response
Published 17 August 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

Established highway maintenance, drainage cleansing, inspection and public-reporting arrangements were considered adequate and exceeded national standards.

Verbatim wording from the response

“(iv) Rotherham has long established procedures for the maintenance of the highway at the accident locus, which are in accordance with and in fact exceed National standards and which may be summarised as follows:-”

Source location

2016-0395-Response-by-Rotherham-Metropolitan-Borough-Council
Page 2 · response
Published 17 August 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.1

  1. 1

    Commission an independent inspection of the A630 at and near the accident location.

    Stated by Rotherham Borough CouncilStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 17 August 2016.

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

  1. 1

    There was no basis to identify the A630 Sheffield Parkway as a high-risk carriageway from a road-safety perspective.

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

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

Commission an independent inspection of the A630 at and near the accident location.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Rotherham MBC takes Mr Dorries’ concerns extremely seriously and has taken a number of steps since the accident to meet these concerns including the following:”

Source location

2016-0395-Response-by-Rotherham-Metropolitan-Borough-Council
Page 2 · response
Published 17 August 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

There was no basis to identify the A630 Sheffield Parkway as a high-risk carriageway from a road-safety perspective.

Verbatim wording from the response

“(xi) there is no basis upon which to identify the A630 Sheffield Parkway as a high risk carriageway from a road safety point of view: furthermore, approximately 50,000 vehicles travel on the Parkway on a daily basis.”

Source location

2016-0395-Response-by-Rotherham-Metropolitan-Borough-Council
Page 3 · response
Published 17 August 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