A coroner has ordered Hertfordshire County Council to take action over lorries parked for loading and unloading on a stretch of road near Tring after a cyclist sustained fatal injuries when he crashed into the back of an HGV whose driver had stopped there ahead of it being unloaded.

David Andrews, aged 63 and from Berkhamsted, died in St George’s Hospital, south London, the day after the crash which happened at Cow Roast on the A4251 Tring Road on 11 July last year, reports HertsLive (link is external).

Witnesses told a coroner’s inquest earlier this year that allowing HGVs to be loaded and unloaded at the location where the fatal crash took place was “an accident waiting to happen,” while a forensic collision investigator said that the practice constituted an “ongoing risk.”

After recording a conclusion of death due to a road traffic collision at the inquest in July, assistant coroner Jacques Howell sent Hertfordshire County Council, which is the highways authority responsible for the stretch of road in question, a Prevention of Future Deaths Report (link is external).

“During the course of the inquest the evidence revealed matters giving rise to concern,” he wrote.

“In my opinion there is a risk that future deaths could occur unless action is taken. In the circumstances it is my statutory duty to report to you.”

The specific matter of concern he raised was “that on this particular stretch of road heavy goods vehicles are permitted to stop in order to unload, thereby effectively blocking the southbound carriageway.”

The report highlighted evidence presented to the inquest regarding the characteristics of road, as well as lorry drivers being permitted to park there for loading and unloading of goods to nearby commercial premises.

“At the location where the road traffic collision occurred, the road is single carriageway road, with one lane serving each direction,” the coroner noted in the report.

“The carriageway is 7 metres wide with each lane measuring approximately 3.1 metres in width with a double solid white line system with a gap between the lines of approximately 0.8 metres.

“Adjacent to the southbound lane is a grass verge, this gives way to an area of hard standing approximately 0.9 metres in width. A footpath is adjacent to the northbound lane.

“The speed limit at this point is 40mph, there are no parking restrictions and it is not a designated clearway.

“Photographs taken of the scene show that notwithstanding the heavy goods vehicle had stopped as far to the left as possible, the vehicle still took up nearly all of the southbound carriageway which bends to the right at this point,” the report continued.

“Heavy goods vehicles frequently park on the southbound carriageway in order to unload, and witnesses have described this as ‘ … an accident waiting to happen’.

“Evidence was also received from the Forensic Collision Investigator, who gave evidence that in his view the current ability for heavy goods vehicles to lawfully stop outside the commercial premises to unload represents an ongoing risk.”

A spokesperson for Hertfordshire County Council, quoted on HertsLive, said that the local authority had responded to the report, as it is required by law to do, and that the council is planning to implement a ban.

“In light of the issues highlighted by the coroner’s report, we are looking to introduce a ban on lorries loading and unloading on this stretch of the A4251,” the spokesperson said.

“We hope to begin the statutory and consultation processes needed to introduce these restrictions in the near future,” they added.

https://road.cc/content/news/council-ordered-act-over-parked-hgvs-after-cyclist-killed-305025

On 10/11/2023 03:51 pm, Simon Mason wrote:

> A coroner has ordered Hertfordshire County Council to take action over lorries parked for loading and unloading on a stretch of road near Tring after a cyclist sustained fatal injuries when he crashed into the back of an HGV whose driver had stopped there ahead of it being unloaded.

When did coroners gain this power to issue orders to elected bodies such
as county councils?

And was the unfortunate victim not looking where he was going? How ever
did he miss seeing a *stationary* *lorry*?

> David Andrews, aged 63 and from Berkhamsted, died in St George’s Hospital, south London, the day after the crash which happened at Cow Roast on the A4251 Tring Road on 11 July last year, reports HertsLive (link is external).
> Witnesses told a coroner’s inquest earlier this year that allowing HGVs to be loaded and unloaded at the location where the fatal crash took place was “an accident waiting to happen,” while a forensic collision investigator said that the practice constituted an “ongoing risk.”

If the loads are delivered to that location because that's where they
are bound, what will happen IF HCC decides to accede to the coroner's
*recommendation*?

The business located there will rapidly go out of business, that's what.
>
> After recording a conclusion of death due to a road traffic collision at the inquest in July, assistant coroner Jacques Howell sent Hertfordshire County Council, which is the highways authority responsible for the stretch of road in question, a Prevention of Future Deaths Report (link is external).

Is the report a lawful order, or something else?

I ask because as we both know, road.cc is staffed by semi-literate
ignoramuses / ignorami (I include the Latin plural noun form only
because it is well-known that you are an accomplished Classics scholar
and are pained by language faux-pas).
>
> “During the course of the inquest the evidence revealed matters giving rise to concern,” he wrote.
> “In my opinion there is a risk that future deaths could occur unless action is taken. In the circumstances it is my statutory duty to report to you.”
> The specific matter of concern he raised was “that on this particular stretch of road heavy goods vehicles are permitted to stop in order to unload, thereby effectively blocking the southbound carriageway.”
> The report highlighted evidence presented to the inquest regarding the characteristics of road, as well as lorry drivers being permitted to park there for loading and unloading of goods to nearby commercial premises.
>
There's the problem... Perhaps the driver should park the lorry a mile
or two away and carry the goods there by hand, even if they consist of
half a ton of building bricks?

> “At the location where the road traffic collision occurred, the road is single carriageway road, with one lane serving each direction,” the coroner noted in the report.
> “The carriageway is 7 metres wide with each lane measuring approximately 3.1 metres in width with a double solid white line system with a gap between the lines of approximately 0.8 metres.

If only he'd speak in English, eh?

The standard width for a traffic lane is twelve feet. The lanes there
appear to be 10.15' wide (10feet, 1.8 inches). That *is* narrow.

But what that has to do with someone cycling at speed into the rear of a
stationary lorry is far from clear, as I am sure you agree. It has
nothing to do with the width of the road, does it?
>
> “Adjacent to the southbound lane is a grass verge, this gives way to an area of hard standing approximately 0.9 metres in width. A footpath is adjacent to the northbound lane.
> “The speed limit at this point is 40mph, there are no parking restrictions and it is not a designated clearway.

"no parking restrictions and not a ... clearway".
>
> “Photographs taken of the scene show that notwithstanding the heavy goods vehicle had stopped as far to the left as possible, the vehicle still took up nearly all of the southbound carriageway which bends to the right at this point,” the report continued.
> “Heavy goods vehicles frequently park on the southbound carriageway in order to unload, and witnesses have described this as ‘ … an accident waiting to happen’.
> “Evidence was also received from the Forensic Collision Investigator, who gave evidence that in his view the current ability for heavy goods vehicles to lawfully stop outside the commercial premises to unload represents an ongoing risk.”
> A spokesperson for Hertfordshire County Council, quoted on HertsLive, said that the local authority had responded to the report, as it is required by law to do, and that the council is planning to implement a ban.

Are they also going to assist the business, financially and otherwise,
to relocate to alternative premises with better delivery access?

> “In light of the issues highlighted by the coroner’s report, we are looking to introduce a ban on lorries loading and unloading on this stretch of the A4251,” the spokesperson said.

Such dilatoriness. Didn't they realise that it was, according to
road.cc, an *order*?

> “We hope to begin the statutory and consultation processes needed to introduce these restrictions in the near future,” they added.

What good will it do?

After all, it doesn't matter where a lorry stops to deliver goods,
someone can run into the back of it while it is stationary, can't they?
The only way to prevent that would be to completely ban lorries from
ever stopping on a highway anywhere at all, including red traffic
lights. A stationary lorry will always create a running-into-its-rear
risk no matter where it is, after all, hmmm?

> https://road.cc/content/news/council-ordered-act-over-parked-hgvs-after-cyclist-killed-305025

One might have to ask why the cyclist failed to see an HGV parked so as to
almost block the lane.

This cyclist didn’t see a parked car, in good daylight with no weather
problems. He just wasn’t looking, as is clear from the video:

<https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9OrKLGEOVRA>

Simon Mason <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:

> A coroner has ordered Hertfordshire County Council to take action over
> lorries parked for loading and unloading on a stretch of road near Tring
> after a cyclist sustained fatal injuries when he crashed into the back of
> an HGV whose driver had stopped there ahead of it being unloaded.

[…]

> https://road.cc/content/news/council-ordered-act-over-parked-hgvs-after-cyclist-killed-305025

--
Spike

Secret_squirrel | 2 hours ago
1 like

But will the restrictions be enforced.....?

Judging from the description and the state of the photos its here abouts:

https://cdn.road.cc/sites/default/files/styles/main_width/public/Screenshot%202023-11-10%20at%2014.26.31.png

On Friday, November 10, 2023 at 5:08:36 PM UTC, Simon Mason wrote:
> Secret_squirrel | 2 hours ago
> 1 like
>
> But will the restrictions be enforced.....?
>
> Judging from the description and the state of the photos its here abouts:
>
> https://cdn.road.cc/sites/default/files/styles/main_width/public/Screenshot%202023-11-10%20at%2014.26.31.png

QUOTE: A spokesperson for Hertfordshire County Council, quoted on HertsLive, said that the local authority had responded to the report, as it is required by law to do, and that the council is planning to implement a ban.

“In light of the issues highlighted by the coroner’s report, we are looking to introduce a ban on lorries loading and unloading on this stretch of the A4251,” the spokesperson said. ENDS

Well done - that wasn't too hard, was it?

Simon Mason <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Friday, November 10, 2023 at 5:08:36 PM UTC, Simon Mason wrote:
>> Secret_squirrel | 2 hours ago
>> 1 like
>>
>> But will the restrictions be enforced.....?
>>
>> Judging from the description and the state of the photos its here abouts:
>>
>> https://cdn.road.cc/sites/default/files/styles/main_width/public/Screenshot%202023-11-10%20at%2014.26.31.png
>
> QUOTE: A spokesperson for Hertfordshire County Council, quoted on
> HertsLive, said that the local authority had responded to the report, as
> it is required by law to do, and that the council is planning to implement a ban.

> “In light of the issues highlighted by the coroner’s report, we are
> looking to introduce a ban on lorries loading and unloading on this
> stretch of the A4251,” the spokesperson said. ENDS

> Well done - that wasn't too hard, was it?

It won’t end the perennial problem of cyclists not looking where they are
going…

<https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PR0YV435Dn0>

--
Spike

Flâneur | 18 min ago
0 likes

It's already illegal to park (or stop) on a road with double white lines FFS

https://www.southyorks.police.uk/find-out/crime-prevention-advice/road-safety/parking-on-double-white-lines/

Why can't the relevant authorities know this and enforce the law?

On 10/11/2023 06:08 pm, Simon Mason wrote:

> Flâneur | 18 min ago
> 0 likes
>
> It's already illegal to park (or stop) on a road with double white lines FFS
>
> https://www.southyorks.police.uk/find-out/crime-prevention-advice/road-safety/parking-on-double-white-lines/
>
> Why can't the relevant authorities know this and enforce the law?

It is an offence to park on an imaginary white line?

There were no such restrictions at the relevant location (according to
road.cc, quoting the police, at least).

chrisonatrike replied to eburtthebike | 1 hour ago
0 likes

Dont worry eburtthebike! They've been on it for (checks calendar) a year, since the Road Safety Investigation Board was launched (link is external) ... oh, they've still not actually started?

Oh well, perhaps this will also come up in their review of road law, which ... oh. Sorry.

On 10/11/2023 04:40 pm, Spike wrote:
>
> One might have to ask why the cyclist failed to see an HGV parked so as to
> almost block the lane.
>
> This cyclist didn’t see a parked car, in good daylight with no weather
> problems. He just wasn’t looking, as is clear from the video:
>
> <https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9OrKLGEOVRA>

Ouch!

No matter how many times you see that, it always shocks (and one can
almost feel the pain... of the vehicle's owner).

Still, the chav's fridge-freezer insurance probably covered the damage.
Assuming the chav on the chav-bike accepted liability, of course.

>
> Simon Mason <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> A coroner has ordered Hertfordshire County Council to take action over
>> lorries parked for loading and unloading on a stretch of road near Tring
>> after a cyclist sustained fatal injuries when he crashed into the back of
>> an HGV whose driver had stopped there ahead of it being unloaded.
>
> […]
>
>> https://road.cc/content/news/council-ordered-act-over-parked-hgvs-after-cyclist-killed-305025
>
>

JNugent <jnugent@mail.com> wrote:
> On 10/11/2023 04:40 pm, Spike wrote:
>>
>> One might have to ask why the cyclist failed to see an HGV parked so as to
>> almost block the lane.
>>
>> This cyclist didn’t see a parked car, in good daylight with no weather
>> problems. He just wasn’t looking, as is clear from the video:
>>
>> <https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9OrKLGEOVRA>
>
> Ouch!
>
> No matter how many times you see that, it always shocks (and one can
> almost feel the pain... of the vehicle's owner).
>
> Still, the chav's fridge-freezer insurance probably covered the damage.
> Assuming the chav on the chav-bike accepted liability, of course.

Yes, it’s a salutary lesson in how cyclists simply don’t look where they
are going, and no amount of legislation will stop them crashing into very
hard things that they just haven’t seen.

>> Simon Mason <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> A coroner has ordered Hertfordshire County Council to take action over
>>> lorries parked for loading and unloading on a stretch of road near Tring
>>> after a cyclist sustained fatal injuries when he crashed into the back of
>>> an HGV whose driver had stopped there ahead of it being unloaded.
>>
>> […]
>>
>>> https://road.cc/content/news/council-ordered-act-over-parked-hgvs-after-cyclist-killed-305025

--
Spike

QUOTE: eburtthebike | 19 hours ago
3 likes

We need a complete new system for road safety, by analysing the risk before someone is killed, not after. ENDS

A coroner deciding that a road should be NO PARKING *IS* a new system!

Simon Mason <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> QUOTE: eburtthebike | 19 hours ago
> 3 likes

> We need a complete new system for road safety, by analysing the risk
> before someone is killed, not after. ENDS

That could help with the 16% of cyclists that are killed in single-vehicle
accidents.

> A coroner deciding that a road should be NO PARKING *IS* a new system!

Getting cyclists to actually look where they are going is probably a hope
too far…

--
Spike

CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH
Mr Andrews was a keen cyclist and had been interested in cycling for about 10 years. On 11 July 2022, he was cycling south along the A4251, Tring Road, where he collided with a stationary heavy good vehicle which had stopped outside commercial premises waiting to unload. Sadly, he suffered significant traumatic injuries from which he did not recover, and he died on 12 July 2022 at St George’s Hospital, London.

The inquest received evidence that:
· At the location where the road traffic collision occurred, the road is single carriageway road, with one lane serving each direction. The carriageway is 7 metres wide with each lane measuring approximately 3.1 metres in width with a

double solid white line system with a gap between the lines of approximately 0.8 metres. Adjacent to the southbound lane is a grass verge, this gives way to an area of hard standing approximately 0.9 metres in width. A footpath is adjacent to the northbound lane.
· The speed limit at this point is 40mph, there are no parking restrictions and it is not a designated clearway.
· Photographs taken of the scene show that notwithstanding the heavy goods vehicle had stopped as far to the left as possible, the vehicle still took up nearly all of the southbound carriageway which bends to the right at this point.
· Heavy goods vehicles frequently park on the southbound carriageway in order to unload, and witnesses have described this as “…an accident waiting to happen.”
· Evidence was also received from the Forensic Collision Investigator, who gave evidence that in his view the current ability for heavy goods vehicles to lawfully stop outside the commercial premises to unload represents an ongoing risk.

ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN
In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I believe your organisation have the power to take such action.
7 YOUR RESPONSE
You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of this report, namely by 18 October 2023. I, the coroner, may extend the period.

Your response must contain details of action taken or proposed to be taken, setting out the timetable for action. Otherwise you must explain why no action is proposed

https://www.judiciary.uk/prevention-of-future-death-reports/david-andrews-prevention-of-future-deaths-report/

The article below carefully avoids any mention of why the cyclist cycled
into the back of the lorry.

As the lorry was parked, i.e. not moving, the only possible conclusion is
that the cyclist cycled into the back of the lorry, not having been aware
of its presence at least until far to late to take avoiding action, such as
braking to a controlled stop or swerving round it.

None of this as addressed, mentioned, or even alluded to in the report. One
might think that this not satisfactory. People are not supposed to walk,
wheel, cycle, or drive into stationary objects.

There is no also no mention of a safety helmet.

Simon Mason <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:

> CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH
> Mr Andrews was a keen cyclist and had been interested in cycling for
> about 10 years. On 11 July 2022, he was cycling south along the A4251,
> Tring Road, where he collided with a stationary heavy good vehicle which
> had stopped outside commercial premises waiting to unload. Sadly, he
> suffered significant traumatic injuries from which he did not recover,
> and he died on 12 July 2022 at St George’s Hospital, London.
>
> The inquest received evidence that:
> · At the location where the road traffic collision occurred, the
> road is single carriageway road, with one lane serving each direction.
> The carriageway is 7 metres wide with each lane measuring approximately
> 3.1 metres in width with a
>
> double solid white line system with a gap between the lines of
> approximately 0.8 metres. Adjacent to the southbound lane is a grass
> verge, this gives way to an area of hard standing approximately 0.9
> metres in width. A footpath is adjacent to the northbound lane.
> · The speed limit at this point is 40mph, there are no parking
> restrictions and it is not a designated clearway.
> · Photographs taken of the scene show that notwithstanding the
> heavy goods vehicle had stopped as far to the left as possible, the
> vehicle still took up nearly all of the southbound carriageway which
> bends to the right at this point.
> · Heavy goods vehicles frequently park on the southbound
> carriageway in order to unload, and witnesses have described this as “…an
> accident waiting to happen.”
> · Evidence was also received from the Forensic Collision
> Investigator, who gave evidence that in his view the current ability for
> heavy goods vehicles to lawfully stop outside the commercial premises to
> unload represents an ongoing risk.
>
> ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN
> In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I
> believe your organisation have the power to take such action.
> 7 YOUR RESPONSE
> You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date
> of this report, namely by 18 October 2023. I, the coroner, may extend the period.
>
> Your response must contain details of action taken or proposed to be
> taken, setting out the timetable for action. Otherwise you must explain
> why no action is proposed
>
> https://www.judiciary.uk/prevention-of-future-death-reports/david-andrews-prevention-of-future-deaths-report/
>

--
Spike

COPIES and PUBLICATION
I have sent a copy of my report to the Chief Coroner and to the following Interested Persons:

1. The family of Mr Andrews.

I am also under a duty to send the Chief Coroner a copy of your response.
The Chief Coroner may publish either or both in a complete or redacted or summary form. He may send a copy of this report to any person who he believes may find it useful or of interest. You may make representations to me, the coroner, at the time of your response, about the release or the publication of your response by the Chief Coroner.

Ping JNugent

Not knowing much at all about Coroner’s Reports, are they available for
public scrutiny, preferably online? Or are they stuck in some Victorian
time-warp of ‘the peasants don’t need to know’, and hence difficult to get?

Spike

Spike <aero.spike@btinternet.invalid> wrote:
>
> The article below carefully avoids any mention of why the cyclist cycled
> into the back of the lorry.
>
> As the lorry was parked, i.e. not moving, the only possible conclusion is
> that the cyclist cycled into the back of the lorry, not having been aware
> of its presence at least until far to late to take avoiding action, such as
> braking to a controlled stop or swerving round it.
>
> None of this as addressed, mentioned, or even alluded to in the report. One
> might think that this not satisfactory. People are not supposed to walk,
> wheel, cycle, or drive into stationary objects.
>
> There is no also no mention of a safety helmet.
>
> Simon Mason <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH
>> Mr Andrews was a keen cyclist and had been interested in cycling for
>> about 10 years. On 11 July 2022, he was cycling south along the A4251,
>> Tring Road, where he collided with a stationary heavy good vehicle which
>> had stopped outside commercial premises waiting to unload. Sadly, he
>> suffered significant traumatic injuries from which he did not recover,
>> and he died on 12 July 2022 at St George’s Hospital, London.
>>
>> The inquest received evidence that:
>> · At the location where the road traffic collision occurred, the
>> road is single carriageway road, with one lane serving each direction.
>> The carriageway is 7 metres wide with each lane measuring approximately
>> 3.1 metres in width with a
>>
>> double solid white line system with a gap between the lines of
>> approximately 0.8 metres. Adjacent to the southbound lane is a grass
>> verge, this gives way to an area of hard standing approximately 0.9
>> metres in width. A footpath is adjacent to the northbound lane.
>> · The speed limit at this point is 40mph, there are no parking
>> restrictions and it is not a designated clearway.
>> · Photographs taken of the scene show that notwithstanding the
>> heavy goods vehicle had stopped as far to the left as possible, the
>> vehicle still took up nearly all of the southbound carriageway which
>> bends to the right at this point.
>> · Heavy goods vehicles frequently park on the southbound
>> carriageway in order to unload, and witnesses have described this as “…an
>> accident waiting to happen.”
>> · Evidence was also received from the Forensic Collision
>> Investigator, who gave evidence that in his view the current ability for
>> heavy goods vehicles to lawfully stop outside the commercial premises to
>> unload represents an ongoing risk.
>>
>> ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN
>> In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I
>> believe your organisation have the power to take such action.
>> 7 YOUR RESPONSE
>> You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date
>> of this report, namely by 18 October 2023. I, the coroner, may extend the period.
>>
>> Your response must contain details of action taken or proposed to be
>> taken, setting out the timetable for action. Otherwise you must explain
>> why no action is proposed
>>
>> https://www.judiciary.uk/prevention-of-future-death-reports/david-andrews-prevention-of-future-deaths-report/

--
Spike

QUOTE:

CORONER’S CONCERNS
During the course of the inquest the evidence revealed matters giving rise to concern. In my opinion there is a risk that future deaths could occur unless action is taken. In the circumstances it is my statutory duty to report to you.

The MATTERS OF CONCERN are as follows.
1. That on this particular stretch of road heavy goods vehicles are permitted to stop in order to unload, thereby effectively blocking the southbound carriageway. ENDS

AND:

CORONER’S LEGAL POWERS
I make this report under paragraph 7, Schedule 5, of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 and Regulations 28 and 29 of the Coroners (Investigations) Regulations 2013.

On 11/11/2023 05:02 pm, Simon Mason wrote:

> CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH
> Mr Andrews was a keen cyclist and had been interested in cycling for about 10 years. On 11 July 2022, he was cycling south along the A4251, Tring Road, where he collided with a stationary heavy good vehicle which had stopped outside commercial premises waiting to unload. Sadly, he suffered significant traumatic injuries from which he did not recover, and he died on 12 July 2022 at St George’s Hospital, London.
>
> The inquest received evidence that:
> · At the location where the road traffic collision occurred, the road is single carriageway road, with one lane serving each direction. The carriageway is 7 metres wide with each lane measuring approximately 3.1 metres in width with a
>
> double solid white line system with a gap between the lines of approximately 0.8 metres. Adjacent to the southbound lane is a grass verge, this gives way to an area of hard standing approximately 0.9 metres in width. A footpath is adjacent to the northbound lane.
> · The speed limit at this point is 40mph, there are no parking restrictions and it is not a designated clearway.
> · Photographs taken of the scene show that notwithstanding the heavy goods vehicle had stopped as far to the left as possible, the vehicle still took up nearly all of the southbound carriageway which bends to the right at this point.
> · Heavy goods vehicles frequently park on the southbound carriageway in order to unload, and witnesses have described this as “…an accident waiting to happen.”
> · Evidence was also received from the Forensic Collision Investigator, who gave evidence that in his view the current ability for heavy goods vehicles to lawfully stop outside the commercial premises to unload represents an ongoing risk.
>
> ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN
> In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I believe your organisation have the power to take such action.
> 7 YOUR RESPONSE
> You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of this report, namely by 18 October 2023. I, the coroner, may extend the period.
>
> Your response must contain details of action taken or proposed to be taken, setting out the timetable for action. Otherwise you must explain why no action is proposed
>
> https://www.judiciary.uk/prevention-of-future-death-reports/david-andrews-prevention-of-future-deaths-report/

How did the collision with the parked lorry happen?

Had the driver covered it with an invisibility cloak?

I had supposed that they were only fiction.

Note: "...there are no parking restrictions and it is not a designated
clearway...".

On 11/11/2023 07:28 pm, Spike wrote:

> Ping JNugent
>
> Not knowing much at all about Coroner’s Reports, are they available for
> public scrutiny, preferably online? Or are they stuck in some Victorian
> time-warp of ‘the peasants don’t need to know’, and hence difficult to get?
>
> Spike
>
> Spike <aero.spike@btinternet.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> The article below carefully avoids any mention of why the cyclist cycled
>> into the back of the lorry.
>>
>> As the lorry was parked, i.e. not moving, the only possible conclusion is
>> that the cyclist cycled into the back of the lorry, not having been aware
>> of its presence at least until far to late to take avoiding action, such as
>> braking to a controlled stop or swerving round it.
>>
>> None of this as addressed, mentioned, or even alluded to in the report. One
>> might think that this not satisfactory. People are not supposed to walk,
>> wheel, cycle, or drive into stationary objects.
>>
>> There is no also no mention of a safety helmet.
>>
>> Simon Mason <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH
>>> Mr Andrews was a keen cyclist and had been interested in cycling for
>>> about 10 years. On 11 July 2022, he was cycling south along the A4251,
>>> Tring Road, where he collided with a stationary heavy good vehicle which
>>> had stopped outside commercial premises waiting to unload. Sadly, he
>>> suffered significant traumatic injuries from which he did not recover,
>>> and he died on 12 July 2022 at St George’s Hospital, London.
>>>
>>> The inquest received evidence that:
>>> · At the location where the road traffic collision occurred, the
>>> road is single carriageway road, with one lane serving each direction.
>>> The carriageway is 7 metres wide with each lane measuring approximately
>>> 3.1 metres in width with a
>>>
>>> double solid white line system with a gap between the lines of
>>> approximately 0.8 metres. Adjacent to the southbound lane is a grass
>>> verge, this gives way to an area of hard standing approximately 0.9
>>> metres in width. A footpath is adjacent to the northbound lane.
>>> · The speed limit at this point is 40mph, there are no parking
>>> restrictions and it is not a designated clearway.
>>> · Photographs taken of the scene show that notwithstanding the
>>> heavy goods vehicle had stopped as far to the left as possible, the
>>> vehicle still took up nearly all of the southbound carriageway which
>>> bends to the right at this point.
>>> · Heavy goods vehicles frequently park on the southbound
>>> carriageway in order to unload, and witnesses have described this as “…an
>>> accident waiting to happen.”
>>> · Evidence was also received from the Forensic Collision
>>> Investigator, who gave evidence that in his view the current ability for
>>> heavy goods vehicles to lawfully stop outside the commercial premises to
>>> unload represents an ongoing risk.
>>>
>>> ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN
>>> In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I
>>> believe your organisation have the power to take such action.
>>> 7 YOUR RESPONSE
>>> You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date
>>> of this report, namely by 18 October 2023. I, the coroner, may extend the period.
>>>
>>> Your response must contain details of action taken or proposed to be
>>> taken, setting out the timetable for action. Otherwise you must explain
>>> why no action is proposed
>>>
>>> https://www.judiciary.uk/prevention-of-future-death-reports/david-andrews-prevention-of-future-deaths-report/

As far as I am aware, Coroner's reports are public documents and copies
may be obtained by any person with an interest in the case (if it not
were not so, newspapers could never quote them, for instance).

Of course, I am not a lawyer and my opinion has to be perceived on that
basis.

Perhaps the opinion of a real lawyer (maybe a renaissance man with
various strings to his bow, lawyer, High Court Judge, PhD in Janitorial
Studies) can elucidate.

[Oops! Four syllables! Apologies. Duh... another four...]

On Friday, November 10, 2023 at 6:08:51 PM UTC, Simon Mason wrote:
> Flâneur | 18 min ago
> 0 likes
>
> It's already illegal to park (or stop) on a road with double white lines FFS
>
> https://www.southyorks.police.uk/find-out/crime-prevention-advice/road-safety/parking-on-double-white-lines/
>
> Why can't the relevant authorities know this and enforce the law?

Here is the relevant law:

https://cdn.road.cc/sites/default/files/styles/main_width/public/Screenshot%202023-11-12%20at%2008.08.30.png

On 12/11/2023 01:47 pm, Simon Mason wrote:

> On Friday, November 10, 2023 at 6:08:51 PM UTC, Simon Mason wrote:
>> Flâneur | 18 min ago

>> It's already illegal to park (or stop) on a road with double white lines FFS
>> https://www.southyorks.police.uk/find-out/crime-prevention-advice/road-safety/parking-on-double-white-lines/
>> Why can't the relevant authorities know this and enforce the law?

> Here is the relevant law:
> https://cdn.road.cc/sites/default/files/styles/main_width/public/Screenshot%202023-11-12%20at%2008.08.30.png

Here is the (far more) relevant FACT:

"...there are no parking restrictions and it is not a designated
clearway...".

ktache | 1 day ago
4 likes

My thoughts are with the family and friends of David.
============================================

A sensible comment at last.

Simon Mason <swldxer1958@gmail.com> quoted:
> ktache | 1 day ago
> 4 likes
>
> My thoughts are with the family and friends of David.

And one that Simon Mason could have made in his first post, but didn’t - he
waited until he had put up a further TEN posts and only then responded to
someone else’s expression of sympathy.

--
Spike

Simon Mason <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> Flâneur | 18 min ago
> 0 likes
>
> It's already illegal to park (or stop) on a road with double white lines FFS
>
> https://www.southyorks.police.uk/find-out/crime-prevention-advice/road-safety/parking-on-double-white-lines/
>
> Why can't the relevant authorities know this and enforce the law?

Too busy, their being swamped by ‘close pass’ (sic) videos?

--
Spike