PFD report

Louis Steven James THOROLD · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 18 Aug 2023•Cambridgeshire and Peterborough

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
2

Of 2 recipients

Stated actions
7

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 correctly apply the Settlement Policy for a 30mph speed limit
  2. Lack of independent medical scrutiny of the continued ability of drivers aged over 70 to drive
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to reliably assess driver fitness and driving safetyPart of recurring concern: Inadequate driver licensing controls for road safety
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

    Conduct a Call for Evidence on driver licensing for people with medical conditions.

    Stated by Department for TransportStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 7 September 2023.
  2. Action

    Analyse responses to the Call for Evidence on driver licensing for people with medical conditions.

    Stated by Department for TransportStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 7 September 2023.
  3. Action

    Implement a 40mph speed limit on the relevant Car Dyke Road area.

    Stated by Cambridgeshire County CouncilStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 7 September 2023.

Respondent positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when it does not describe a specific action.4

  1. Position

    Current licensing arrangements for drivers renewing at age 70 are considered a proportionate balance of fairness, road safety and individual interests.

    Stated by Department for TransportExisting arrangements considered sufficientThe respondent said that existing arrangements were sufficient, so no further action was needed.

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 correctly apply the Settlement Policy for a 30mph speed limit

Wider context from the report

“Louis’ father gave evidence at the inquest stating that he understood that this particular location fell within CCC’s ‘Settlement Policy’ for a 30mph speed limit(link included below). The inquest also heard evidence that, unsurprisingly, the risk to life as a result of a road traffic collision reduces with the speed of any impact involving a vehicle. https://www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/residents/travel-roads-and-parking/roads-and-pathways/improving-the-local-highway/speeding/alternative-speed-measures I am therefore concerned that there is a risk of death occurring in similar circumstances if it is correct that CCC’s ‘Settlement Policy’ is not being correctly applied. ”

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 independent medical scrutiny of the continued ability of drivers aged over 70 to drive

Wider context from the report

“During the inquest I heard evidence that drivers who reach 70 years of age and are therefore required to reapply for their driving licence at that point(and thereafter every 3 years) do so via an online self-certification process and that there is no need for independent medical scrutiny or input unless there is an issue which is specifically drawn to the attention of a medical practitioner. In this case one of the drivers involved in the road traffic collision was driving with undiagnosed dementia which effected their cognitive ability to perceive hazards on the road. I am concerned that if drivers beyond the age of 70 continue to drive without independent medical scrutiny of their continued ability to drive then there is a risk of deaths occurring in similar circumstances. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to reliably assess driver fitness and driving safety; Inadequate driver licensing controls for road safety.

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

Conduct a Call for Evidence on driver licensing for people with medical conditions.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The DVLA recently published a Call for Evidence (CfE) on driver licensing for people with medical conditions. The CfE ran for 12 weeks and was an early stage request for input into a review of the legislative framework. Evidence has been gathered from members of the public and a range of experts across organisations. The CfE closed on 22 October and the responses are currently being analysed.”

Source location

Response from Department for Transport
Page 2 · response
Published 7 September 2023

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

Analyse responses to the Call for Evidence on driver licensing for people with medical conditions.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The DVLA recently published a Call for Evidence (CfE) on driver licensing for people with medical conditions. The CfE ran for 12 weeks and was an early stage request for input into a review of the legislative framework. Evidence has been gathered from members of the public and a range of experts across organisations. The CfE closed on 22 October and the responses are currently being analysed.”

Source location

Response from Department for Transport
Page 2 · response
Published 7 September 2023

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 a 40mph speed limit on the relevant Car Dyke Road area.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Since the collision, the County Council, in collaboration with Cambridgeshire Constabulary and developers Urban and Civic, have implemented a reduced speed limit in this area to 40mph, and have overseen the delivery of improvements associated with the Waterbeach New Town development, including a pedestrian crossing, and enhanced walking and cycling provision on the A10. A separate note was provided to the inquest outlining these changes.”

Source location

Response from Cambridge County Council
Page 1 · response
Published 7 September 2023

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

Keep A10 speeds under review as the route’s physical design and safety arrangements develop.

Verbatim wording from the response

“However, speeds on the A10 will remain under review, and road safety forms a key component of the A10 Outline Business Case (due to report in Summer 2024), which has potential to change the physical nature of the route.”

Source location

Response from Cambridge County Council
Page 4 · response
Published 7 September 2023

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

Current licensing arrangements for drivers renewing at age 70 are considered a proportionate balance of fairness, road safety and individual interests.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In regard to older drivers, it is recognised that health can deteriorate in later life and driving licences expire at age 70 and are then renewed at least every three years. Applicants renewing a licence from age 70 must declare that they meet the legal eyesight standards for safe driving and confirm whether they have any relevant medical conditions which may affect safe driving. These regular renewals provide a timely reminder for drivers to consider their health in the context of driving.”

Source location

Response from Department for Transport
Page 2 · response
Published 7 September 2023

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 is little evidence that mandatory testing or medical examination for older drivers would improve road safety.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We have considered whether any changes to this policy are justified and proportionate. Driver licensing arrangements are designed to be balanced and proportionate for all drivers, and we are of the view that the current process for drivers renewing their licence at 70 strikes the appropriate balance between fairness, road safety and the individual. There is little evidence to suggest that introducing a stricter regime which includes mandatory testing or medical examination would improve road safety. For this reason, we do not propose to change the current approach.”

Source location

Response from Department for Transport
Page 2 · response
Published 7 September 2023

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

The Car Dyke Road section does not meet the policy definition of a settlement warranting a 30mph limit.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The County Council will work towards the introduction of a 30mph speed limit in the developed parts of all settlements in the County where appropriate in relation to the nature of the street frontage, activity, environment, and density. Where suitable and affordable, complementary features may be required to encourage drivers to travel at an appropriate speed. Each location will be considered on its own merit.”

Source location

Response from Cambridge County Council
Page 2 · response
Published 7 September 2023

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

No further speed-limit reduction is proposed, based on the route, observed speeds, policies and police safety assessment.

Verbatim wording from the response

“At the present time, based on (i) the nature of the route, (ii) observed vehicle speeds, (iii) national and local policies and (iv) comments from Cambridgeshire Police support, we do not propose to reduce the speed further.”

Source location

Response from Cambridge County Council
Page 4 · response
Published 7 September 2023

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.3

  1. 1

    Develop the A10 Outline Business Case, including stakeholder engagement and statutory consultations, to identify strategic safety-related improvements for further development.

    Stated by Cambridgeshire County CouncilStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 7 September 2023.
  2. 2

    Deliver Waterbeach New Town transport-safety improvements, including a pedestrian crossing and enhanced walking and cycling provision on the A10.

    Stated by Cambridgeshire County CouncilStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 7 September 2023.
  3. 3

    Develop segregated mass transit and adjacent non-motorised routes with the Greater Cambridge Partnership.

    Stated by Cambridgeshire County CouncilStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 7 September 2023.

Recipient positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when they do not describe a specific action.2

  1. 1

    A further speed-limit reduction is unlikely to achieve compliance under the current road and development environment.

    Stated by Cambridgeshire County CouncilUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.
  2. 2

    The fatal collision was not speed related, and a 30mph limit would be unlikely to have changed its outcome.

    Stated by Cambridgeshire County 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

Develop the A10 Outline Business Case, including stakeholder engagement and statutory consultations, to identify strategic safety-related improvements for further development.

Verbatim wording from the response

“However, the County Council and the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority (CPCA) are presently developing an Outline Business Case to implement strategic enhancements of the A10 corridor. Route safety is a key consideration in the development of the business case. In July 2023 the Project Board confirmed that the following four packages should be developed within the Outline Business Case:”

Source location

Response from Cambridge County Council
Page 1 · response
Published 7 September 2023

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

Deliver Waterbeach New Town transport-safety improvements, including a pedestrian crossing and enhanced walking and cycling provision on the A10.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Since the collision, the County Council, in collaboration with Cambridgeshire Constabulary and developers Urban and Civic, have implemented a reduced speed limit in this area to 40mph, and have overseen the delivery of improvements associated with the Waterbeach New Town development, including a pedestrian crossing, and enhanced walking and cycling provision on the A10. A separate note was provided to the inquest outlining these changes.”

Source location

Response from Cambridge County Council
Page 1 · response
Published 7 September 2023

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

Develop segregated mass transit and adjacent non-motorised routes with the Greater Cambridge Partnership.

Verbatim wording from the response

“As part of the agreed planning mitigated for the Waterbeach New Town, a range of measures have been secured to provide enhanced services and facilities for non-motorised road users, including a railway station, off-road walking and cycling and equestrian routes, and bus services. Furthermore, with the Greater Cambridge Partnership, we are developing segregated mass transit and adjacent non-motorised routes which will contribute to the safety and sustainability of the network in the area.”

Source location

Response from Cambridge County Council
Page 4 · response
Published 7 September 2023

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

A further speed-limit reduction is unlikely to achieve compliance under the current road and development environment.

Verbatim wording from the response

“There are safety implications with installing an artificially low speed limit. Speed limits should be easy to determine and should encourage self-compliance, i.e., the visual clues should tell a driver what the appropriate speed is, and it will feel natural as they are driving.”

Source location

Response from Cambridge County Council
Page 3 · response
Published 7 September 2023

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

The fatal collision was not speed related, and a 30mph limit would be unlikely to have changed its outcome.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Cambridgeshire County Council has sought the view from the police regarding safe speeds in this location. Cambridgeshire Constabulary does not support a reduction in the speed limit to 30mph, commenting that:”

Source location

Response from Cambridge County Council
Page 3 · response
Published 7 September 2023

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