Harry Jellicoe

PFD Report Historic (No Identified Response) Ref: 2018-0108
Date of Report 18 April 2018
Coroner Paul Smith
Coroner Area Lincolnshire
Response Deadline est. 12 August 2018
No published response · Over 2 years old
Response Status
Responses 0 of 1
56-Day Deadline 12 Aug 2018
Over 2 years old — no identified published response
About PFD responses

Organisations named in PFD reports must respond within 56 days explaining what actions they are taking.

Source: Courts and Tribunals Judiciary

Coroner's Concerns
During the couree of the Inquest the evidence revealed matters glvlng rise t0 concern. In my oplnlon there is a rsk that futura deaths will occur unless action Is takon. In circumstances it is my statutory duty to' report to you: a8 follows_ The section of road where this Incldent occured is subject t0 no spectilc spead restriction: The national speed limit applled The nature of the brldge congtruction Imposes a helght restrlction on vehicles passing underneath of 4.6m (15 Feet 3 Inches) The arch of tho brldge Is such that the full height Is only avallable t0 vehicles using the centre of the carriageway: The brldge properly bears clear slgnage advising of that risk and gulding hlgh elded vehicles towards the centre of the carriageway: recelved evldence that on both approaches to the brldge there is clear slgnage warning drivera of the exletence of the bridge and its helght restrictlon, and advlslng hlgh slded vehlcles t0 utllise the centre of the available carlageway: Athough traffic approaching from the West has a clear view of the brldge for some considerable distance, the nature of the landecape i8 8uch that it Ie not posslble to &e0 any slgnlicant distance beyond the bridge arch to Identify trafiic, especlally hlgh slded vehlcles whlch may ba occupylng the centre of the carrlageway; approaching from the East (I) Similarly; and for the same reasons, tralilc approaching from the East has a much reduced 'Vew of tha approach t0 thebridge and cannot identify traffic approachlng from the Wost: (Vii) In Ilght of the current slgnage and proper recommendatlon that high sided vehlcles utlllee the cantre of the carrlageway, given the restrlcted Ilne of vlslon through the bridge arch; you may feel that the current speed Ilmit is too hlgh and requlres revieion. Likewise, there is no glgnage Indlcating priority of passaga where high slded vehicles are requlred to utlllse the full canlageway: (VhIi) Whilst / received evldence that there have baen very few reported collisions involving HGVs at this location, there was a clear consensus among the local drlvers who gave evldence that thls location posed a 8lgnliicant potential hazard, for the reasons glven above, particularly for those motorists who were not famlllar with the area:
Action Should Be Taken
In my oplnlon action ghould be taken to prevent future deaths and believe you ANDIOR your organisation have the power t0 take such action.
Report Sections
Investigation and Inquest
On 28 October 2016 commenced an investlgatlon into the death of Harry James Jelllcoe aged 26 The investigatlon concluded at the end of the inquest on 27 March 2018. The concluslon of the Inquest was that Mr Jellicoe dled a8 a result of a Road Traffic Collislon; the medlcal cause of death being: Ia. Traumatic Braln Injury Rib Fractures and Lung Contusions CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH On 16 October 2016 Mr Jellicoa was drivIng his MG TF motor car, reglstered number YT 03 OSU eastbound on the A151 road between Colsterworth and Corby Glon; Lincolnshlre. Although not ralning at the time, It had previously ralned heavily and the road surface was wet: Shortly before reaching Corby Glen Mr Jellicoe reached & point at whlch the road passed underneath & brldga cartylng a railway line.
3. Mr Jellicoe drove underneath the bridge: The road turned t0 his rlght atan angle of over 30 degrees and began t0 climb uphllI: As Mr Jellicoa followed the road, he lost control of his vehlcle whlch Ieft the carriageway to the nearside, sufferlng a Impact wlth a roadeide trea: Mr Jelllcoe suffered severe injuries from which he died In hospital some days later Mr Jellicoa had purchased hls vehicle from & reputable garage eariler in the year: It had been sublect t0 an MOT test on June 2016 and had been given a certlilcate. No advisory matters ware raleed at that time:
5. Despite that hlstory, the vehlcle was found to have front tyres whlch were each extonslvely worn and displaying signifilcantly les8 than the legal mInlmum depth of tread required: Evidence was recelved that the patter of wear was Ilkely to have resulted from a longstandlng mleallgnment of a steering or suspangion component within the vehlcle. The cause Of the loss of control and consequent road trafic collision was found to boa comblnatlon of the spead at whkh the vehlcle was drlven, the wet road conditlons prevailing at the tlme and the lack of tread on the front tyres whlch arose from the manner In which the vehicle had been set up. heawy 17h _

5. CORONER'S CONCERNS During the couree of the Inquest the evidence revealed matters glvlng rise t0 concern. In my oplnlon there is a rsk that futura deaths will occur unless action Is takon. In circumstances it is my statutory duty to' report to you: The MATTERS OF CONCERN are a8 follows_ The section of road where this Incldent occured is subject t0 no spectilc spead restriction: The national speed limit applled The nature of the brldge congtruction Imposes a helght restrlction on vehicles passing underneath of 4.6m (15 Feet 3 Inches) The arch of tho brldge Is such that the full height Is only avallable t0 vehicles using the centre of the carriageway: The brldge properly bears clear slgnage advising of that risk and gulding hlgh elded vehicles towards the centre of the carriageway: recelved evldence that on both approaches to the brldge there is clear slgnage warning drivera of the exletence of the bridge and its helght restrictlon, and advlslng hlgh slded vehlcles t0 utllise the centre of the available carlageway: Athough traffic approaching from the West has a clear view of the brldge for some considerable distance, the nature of the landecape i8 8uch that it Ie not posslble to &e0 any slgnlicant distance beyond the bridge arch to Identify trafiic, especlally hlgh slded vehlcles whlch may ba occupylng the centre of the carrlageway; approaching from the East (I) Similarly; and for the same reasons, tralilc approaching from the East has a much reduced 'Vew of tha approach t0 thebridge and cannot identify traffic approachlng from the Wost: (Vii) In Ilght of the current slgnage and proper recommendatlon that high sided vehlcles utlllee the cantre of the carrlageway, given the restrlcted Ilne of vlslon through the bridge arch; you may feel that the current speed Ilmit is too hlgh and requlres revieion. Likewise, there is no glgnage Indlcating priority of passaga where high slded vehicles are requlred to utlllse the full canlageway: (VhIi) Whilst / received evldence that there have baen very few reported collisions involving HGVs at this location, there was a clear consensus among the local drlvers who gave evldence that thls location posed a 8lgnliicant potential hazard, for the reasons glven above, particularly for those motorists who were not famlllar with the area:
6. ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN In my oplnlon action ghould be taken to prevent future deaths and believe you ANDIOR your organisation have the power t0 take such action. YOUR RESPONSE You are under a duty to respond t0 thls report wlthin 56 daye of the date of this report, namely by 13 June 2018. |, the Coroner, may extend the perlod Your reeponse must contain detalls of actlon taken or proposed to be taken, setting out the tmetable for action. Othenwise you must explain why no action is proposed: the
Circumstances of the Death
On 16 October 2016 Mr Jellicoa was drivIng his MG TF motor car, reglstered number YT 03 OSU eastbound on the A151 road between Colsterworth and Corby Glon; Lincolnshlre. Although not ralning at the time, It had previously ralned heavily and the road surface was wet: Shortly before reaching Corby Glen Mr Jellicoe reached & point at whlch the road passed underneath & brldga cartylng a railway line.
3. Mr Jellicoe drove underneath the bridge: The road turned t0 his rlght atan angle of over 30 degrees and began t0 climb uphllI: As Mr Jellicoa followed the road, he lost control of his vehlcle whlch Ieft the carriageway to the nearside, sufferlng a Impact wlth a roadeide trea: Mr Jelllcoe suffered severe injuries from which he died In hospital some days later Mr Jellicoa had purchased hls vehicle from & reputable garage eariler in the year: It had been sublect t0 an MOT test on June 2016 and had been given a certlilcate. No advisory matters ware raleed at that time:
5. Despite that hlstory, the vehlcle was found to have front tyres whlch were each extonslvely worn and displaying signifilcantly les8 than the legal mInlmum depth of tread required: Evidence was recelved that the patter of wear was Ilkely to have resulted from a longstandlng mleallgnment of a steering or suspangion component within the vehlcle. The cause Of the loss of control and consequent road trafic collision was found to boa comblnatlon of the spead at whkh the vehlcle was drlven, the wet road conditlons prevailing at the tlme and the lack of tread on the front tyres whlch arose from the manner In which the vehicle had been set up. heawy 17h _
Related Inquiry Recommendations

Public inquiry recommendations addressing similar themes

Data sourced from Courts and Tribunals Judiciary under the Open Government Licence.