PFD report

Darren WILSON · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 5 Dec 2019•Lincolnshire

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
0

Of 2 recipients

Stated actions
0

Described in 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.

Report evidence summary

Concerns raised2

  1. Failure to provide an appropriate reduced speed limit at the hazardous location
    Part of recurring concern: Inadequate speed control at hazardous road locations
  2. Failure to deploy double white lines at the hazardous location
    Part of recurring concern: Unsafe overtaking controls on hazardous road sections
Responses linked to these concerns

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

No linked response statements

No respondent-stated action or position is clearly linked to these concerns.

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 provide an appropriate reduced speed limit at the hazardous location

Wider context from the report

“i.        The Inquest heard from a Forensic Collision Investigator and a local resident who was also a former Highways Officer who both confirmed that the location of the collision was a notorious accident "hotspot", in that whilst there had been no previous fatalities, there had been innumerable "near misses" as well as non-fatal road traffic collisions; ii.       The inherent danger of the location arose because of a lack of traffic calming measures such as a reduction of the speed limit at this location as well as deployment of double white lines to inform drivers of the potential hazard and to prevent overtaking; ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Inadequate speed control at hazardous road locations.

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

Failure to deploy double white lines at the hazardous location

Wider context from the report

“i.        The Inquest heard from a Forensic Collision Investigator and a local resident who was also a former Highways Officer who both confirmed that the location of the collision was a notorious accident "hotspot", in that whilst there had been no previous fatalities, there had been innumerable "near misses" as well as non-fatal road traffic collisions; ii.       The inherent danger of the location arose because of a lack of traffic calming measures such as a reduction of the speed limit at this location as well as deployment of double white lines to inform drivers of the potential hazard and to prevent overtaking; ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unsafe overtaking controls on hazardous road sections.

Open source report
Back to top

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

Official responses located
0/2

Data last updated 7 September 2026

No official response is included in the current published snapshot.