PFD report

Aaron Darie James Fretwell · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 5 Oct 2021•West Yorkshire Eastern

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
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. Lack of warning signs directing that trailer bodies be propped before work underneath
  2. Lack of mechanical propping devices on agricultural trailers
    Part of recurring concern: Unsafe agricultural tractor and trailer safety arrangements
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.4

  1. Action

    Design tipping trailers so routine maintenance does not require work beneath a raised body.

    Stated by Bailey Trailers LimitedStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 13 October 2021.
  2. Action

    Manufacture all tipping body models with hinged mechanical body props as standard safety features.

    Stated by Bailey Trailers LimitedStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 13 October 2021.
  3. Action

    Use safety decals to reinforce that users should not raise the trailer body unless necessary and securely supported.

    Stated by Bailey Trailers LimitedStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 13 October 2021.

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 warning signs directing that trailer bodies be propped before work underneath

Wider context from the report

“1. No propping device was fitted to the trailer, which is understood to have been manufactured by Bailey Trailers Ltd in about 2002. 2. No warning signs were affixed to the trailer directing that the trailer body should be propped before anyone worked underneath it. 3. Trailers manufactured by 2002 should have complied with BS EN 1853: 1999 and/or the supply of machinery (Safety) Regulations 1992 which required a mechanical support to be installed to facilitate maintenance work to be carried out safely. 4. Evidence taken at the Inquest indicated that many types of agricultural trailers were in use without such propping devices or warning signs, which gives rise to concern that comparable accidents could occur in the future. ”

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 mechanical propping devices on agricultural trailers

Wider context from the report

“1. No propping device was fitted to the trailer, which is understood to have been manufactured by Bailey Trailers Ltd in about 2002. 2. No warning signs were affixed to the trailer directing that the trailer body should be propped before anyone worked underneath it. 3. Trailers manufactured by 2002 should have complied with BS EN 1853: 1999 and/or the supply of machinery (Safety) Regulations 1992 which required a mechanical support to be installed to facilitate maintenance work to be carried out safely. 4. Evidence taken at the Inquest indicated that many types of agricultural trailers were in use without such propping devices or warning signs, which gives rise to concern that comparable accidents could occur in the future. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unsafe agricultural tractor and trailer safety arrangements.

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

Design tipping trailers so routine maintenance does not require work beneath a raised body.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The Company has designed the tipping trailers in a way which eliminates the need for maintenance to be carried out underneath a raised body which in itself would introduce potential risks which would need to be managed and reduced by engineering controls, i.e. by use of a prop.”

Source location

2021-0331-Response-from-Bailey-Trailers-Ltd_Published
Page 1 · response
Published 13 October 2021

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

Manufacture all tipping body models with hinged mechanical body props as standard safety features.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Notwithstanding that point, the Company can confirm that all of its tipping body models are now manufactured with body props as a standard feature as per paragraph 4.7.2 of BS EN 1853:2017 which states that “a mechanical support hinged to the trailer, in conformity with the requirements given in EN ISO 4254-1:2015, 4.11 shall be provided to secure the body in high position during maintenance operations”.”

Source location

2021-0331-Response-from-Bailey-Trailers-Ltd_Published
Page 1 · response
Published 13 October 2021

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

Use safety decals to reinforce that users should not raise the trailer body unless necessary and securely supported.

Verbatim wording from the response

“raise the body, the design of the trailer permits normal maintenance activities and adjustments to be undertaken without the need to raise the tipping body. In extraordinary circumstances where it may become necessary to raise the body, deploy the [mechanical body] support as described below”. The Manual reiterates the warning that users should “never work beneath the raised trailer body unless it is securely propped and supported”, and guidance is also given on how to deploy and stow the body support safely. Relevant safety decals (or signs) continue to be used to reinforce this point about not tipping the body unless absolutely necessary in the opinion of the user.”

Source location

2021-0331-Response-from-Bailey-Trailers-Ltd_Published
Page 2 · response
Published 13 October 2021

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

Revise the Operation and Maintenance Manual to require safe deployment of body supports and prohibit work beneath an unsecured raised body.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The general safety instructions within the Company’s revised Operation & Maintenance Manual for all tipping body trailers now states, “For normal maintenance and repairs it is not necessary to”

Source location

2021-0331-Response-from-Bailey-Trailers-Ltd_Published
Page 1 · response
Published 13 October 2021

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.2

  1. 1

    Email trade dealers with safety guidance for explaining routine-maintenance restrictions and the standard prop feature to customers.

    Stated by Bailey Trailers LimitedStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 13 October 2021.
  2. 2

    Test body props under loads up to 8,000 kilograms to demonstrate their strength and resistance to deformation or damage.

    Stated by Bailey Trailers LimitedStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 13 October 2021.

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

Email trade dealers with safety guidance for explaining routine-maintenance restrictions and the standard prop feature to customers.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Lastly, the Company has emailed its trade dealers (who sell to end users) to ask that they explain to their customers that the Company’s tipping trailers have been designed in a way which does not require the trailer to be raised for routine maintenance and adjustments but should they decide to do so, a prop has been fitted as a standard safety feature.”

Source location

2021-0331-Response-from-Bailey-Trailers-Ltd_Published
Page 2 · response
Published 13 October 2021

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

Test body props under loads up to 8,000 kilograms to demonstrate their strength and resistance to deformation or damage.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The maximum weight of a tipper body is 4000kg of which approximately half is supported by the hinges. The prop therefore needs to be able to support 2000kg. Tests have been carried out on the Company’s tipping body models which demonstrated that the prop can support the entire 4000kg. Subsequent tests were carried out to 8000kg and these caused no deformation or damage to the prop, thereby demonstrating its strength.”

Source location

2021-0331-Response-from-Bailey-Trailers-Ltd_Published
Page 1 · response
Published 13 October 2021

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