Elijah Oluwagbenga Shotade · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 10 Sep 2018•North West Wales

Published report and response evidence

This report’s concerns and statements found in recipients’ published responses. Statements are included even where no link to an individual concern is recorded. A link shows an 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
6

Described in responses

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. Road layout preventing westbound motorists from returning to the nearside lane after overtaking
    Part of recurring concern: Unsafe overtaking controls on hazardous road sectionsPart of recurring concern: Unsafe road design and layout
  2. Satnav directions encouraging westbound motorists to enter the eastbound lane

Stated actions An action is something a recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to a concern raised.6

  1. Welsh Government

    Extend double white lines across Britannia Bridge and install lane arrows reinforcing the direction of travel.

  2. Welsh Government

    Review traffic signing and road markings across Britannia Bridge to identify recommended safety improvements.

  3. Welsh Government

    Continue monitoring site safety through the Stage 4 Road Safety Audit process.

  4. Welsh Government

    Improve signing to reinforce that vehicles should keep left.

  5. Welsh Government

    Carry out a Stage 3 Road Safety Audit after implementing all improvements.

  6. Welsh Government

    Complete Stage 1 and Stage 2 Road Safety Audits for the improvement designs.

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

  1. Welsh Government

    Traffic signs and road markings complied with required standards, and collision records showed no historical pattern of similar incidents.

    Disputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.
  2. Welsh Government

    Drivers remain responsible for disregarding satellite-navigation instructions that would endanger road users or breach road safety standards.

    Redirects responsibilityThe respondent said that another organisation was responsible for deciding or taking action.

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 layout preventing westbound motorists from returning to the nearside lane after overtaking

Wider context from the report

“(1) That the layout of the road is such that motorists driving in a west bound direction will remain the east bound lane after overtaking and are unable to return to their nearside lane. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unsafe overtaking controls on hazardous road sections; 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

Satnav directions encouraging westbound motorists to enter the eastbound lane

Wider context from the report

“(2) That many sat.navs direct a west bound motorist to bear right thereby encouraging them to enter onto the east bound lane ”

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

Extend double white lines across Britannia Bridge and install lane arrows reinforcing the direction of travel.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The extension of the double white lines prohibiting overtaking over the whole length of Britannia Bridge and lane arrows to reinforce the direction of travel has now been completed. Improvements to the signing, which will affirm that vehicles should keep left, will follow before the end of the financial year.”

Source location

2018-0290-Response-by-Department-for-Economy-and-ntrastructure
Page 2 · response
Published 18 January 2019

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

Review traffic signing and road markings across Britannia Bridge to identify recommended safety improvements.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Notwithstanding the outcome of these investigations the Welsh Government decided to carry out a review of the traffic signing and road markings across the A55 Britannia Bridge and implement any recommended improvements as soon as possible in the 2017/18 financial year.”

Source location

2018-0290-Response-by-Department-for-Economy-and-ntrastructure
Page 2 · response
Published 18 January 2019

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

Continue monitoring site safety through the Stage 4 Road Safety Audit process.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The design of all improvements has been subject to Stage 1 and 2 Road Safety Audits. A Stage 3 Road Safety Audit will be carried out following the implementation of all the improvements. The safety of the site will continue to be monitored as part of the Stage 4 Road Safety Audit process.”

Source location

2018-0290-Response-by-Department-for-Economy-and-ntrastructure
Page 2 · response
Published 18 January 2019

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

Improve signing to reinforce that vehicles should keep left.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The extension of the double white lines prohibiting overtaking over the whole length of Britannia Bridge and lane arrows to reinforce the direction of travel has now been completed. Improvements to the signing, which will affirm that vehicles should keep left, will follow before the end of the financial year.”

Source location

2018-0290-Response-by-Department-for-Economy-and-ntrastructure
Page 2 · response
Published 18 January 2019

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

Carry out a Stage 3 Road Safety Audit after implementing all improvements.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The design of all improvements has been subject to Stage 1 and 2 Road Safety Audits. A Stage 3 Road Safety Audit will be carried out following the implementation of all the improvements. The safety of the site will continue to be monitored as part of the Stage 4 Road Safety Audit process.”

Source location

2018-0290-Response-by-Department-for-Economy-and-ntrastructure
Page 2 · response
Published 18 January 2019

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

Complete Stage 1 and Stage 2 Road Safety Audits for the improvement designs.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The design of all improvements has been subject to Stage 1 and 2 Road Safety Audits. A Stage 3 Road Safety Audit will be carried out following the implementation of all the improvements. The safety of the site will continue to be monitored as part of the Stage 4 Road Safety Audit process.”

Source location

2018-0290-Response-by-Department-for-Economy-and-ntrastructure
Page 2 · response
Published 18 January 2019

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

Traffic signs and road markings complied with required standards, and collision records showed no historical pattern of similar incidents.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The traffic signs and road markings were in compliance with the required standard – the Traffic Sign Regulations and General Directions (TSRGD) 2016. The collision records for the previous 5 years (1st January 2013 to 31st December 2017) did not highlight a pattern of previous collisions similar in nature to those outlined above.”

Source location

2018-0290-Response-by-Department-for-Economy-and-ntrastructure
Page 2 · response
Published 18 January 2019

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

Drivers remain responsible for disregarding satellite-navigation instructions that would endanger road users or breach road safety standards.

Verbatim wording from the response

“While satellite navigation systems are navigational tool for drivers, it remains the driver’s responsibility to observe and obey road markings and signs. If a satellite navigation system instruction is likely to lead to a manoeuvre that endangers other road users, the driver of a vehicle should not comply with it. Drivers must not follow any satellite navigation system instructions which would be to the detriment of road safety.”

Source location

2018-0290-Response-by-Department-for-Economy-and-ntrastructure
Page 2 · response
Published 18 January 2019

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

Official responses located
1/1

Data last updated 7 September 2026