Georgina Taylor

Date of report: 9 July 2014 Ref: 2014-0328 Deceased name: Georgina Taylor Coroners name: Simon Nelson Coroners Area: Manchester (North) Category: Road (Highways Safety) related deaths This report is being sent to: Department for Transport | Highways Agency | REDACTED

REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS (1)

REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO:

1, Department of Transport

2. The Highways Agency, Piccadilly Gate, Manchester

3. Police Sergeant

4. Family of the deceased

CORONER

tam the Senior Coroner for the coroner area of Manchester North

CORONER’S LEGAL POWERS

I make this report under paragraph 7, Schedule 5, of the Coroner’s and Justice Act 2009 and regulations 28 and 29 of the Coroners (Investigations} Regulations 2013

INVESTIGATION and INQUEST

On the 31 January 2014 | commenced an investigation into the death of Georgina Lauren Taylor whose death was reported to my office on the 27" January 2014. The cause of death following Post Mortem Examination was that of 1a) Multi-organ injury. | finalised the Inquest on the 25" June 2014 with a conclusion of ‘Road Traffic Collision’.

CIRCUMSTANCES OF DEATH

A combination of inexperience and excessive speed contributed to the driver losing control of a motor vehicle which was being driven in lane 2 of 2 on the A627(M) whereupon the vehicle rotated anti-clockwise through 90 degrees as it crossed lane 1 and mounted the embankment to the nearside where the rear offside of the vehicle collided with a tree which impact resulted in the vehicle rolling up onto the tree and rotating clockwise through 180 Degrees before coming to rest.

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 will 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. The section of the A627(M) where this incident occurred forms the south bank carriageway of the motorway, approaching Junction 1 at Chadderton, Oldham. The A627(M) is a two lane, dual carriageway and is subject to motorway regulations including the national (70 miles per hour) speed restriction.

2. The introduction of the interim requirements for road restraint systems in 2002 identified that alt trees with a girth exceeding 500mm (or several closely spaced trees) located within a distance of 4.5m from the paved carriageway require protection. The re-issued requirements in 2004 identified that trees above 300mm in girth should be protected by a suitable vehicle restraint system.

3. Current design standard TD19/06 includes a site specific risk process where topographical features, together with adjacent sources of risk are reviewed in order to identify the most appropriate restraint facility and containment levels and that in relation to the presence of trees adjacent to the nearside verge and protection requirements, it is unclear as to when these germinated and it is likely that they are all ‘self-seeded’ with the larger specimens being over 10 years old. Whilst the vehicle restraint systems in place comply with identified requirements at the time of the construction of the route, there are no current requirements to inspect soft estate as it develops in terms of assessing protection requirements. The application of more recent design standards would have required some of the trees at this location to be protected (as weil as the lighting columns) or removed within the 4.5m threshold.

4. HEEB in evidence stated that ‘it might be prudent to remove some of the trees and that the issue of a Regulation 28 report would generate a review of the area in question’.

ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN

Department of Transport in conjunction with The Highways Agency to consider the implications to ameliorate and / or negate the consequences arising from the impact of motor vehicles with read lighting columns and trees.

YOUR RESPONSE

You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of this report, namely an September 2014. |, 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.

COPIES and PUBLICATION

1. [have sent a copy of my report to the Chief Coroner and to the following Interested Persons namely Department of Transport

The Highways Agency, Piccadilly Gate, Manchester Police sergeant Family of the deceased

The Chief Coroner

ype sy

tam 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 from. 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 coronerat the time of your response, about the release or the publication of your response by the Chief Coroner.

Date: 09/07/2014 Signed: