Corporate Manslaughter
Discussion
Could a council be brought to book under this act, should someone die as a result of 'overparking' along a road whereby there is a severe blind spot yet over several years they have been advised of the problem and done nothing about it, as in their opinion.'There is nothing wrong with the present arrangements'
It seems that a Duty of Care is mentioned in the Act ,but not sure if this extends to roads where parking makes travel along it hazardous.
It seems that a Duty of Care is mentioned in the Act ,but not sure if this extends to roads where parking makes travel along it hazardous.
Is the road in question marked out specifically for parking, i.e. marked bays, 'P' sign, meters, etc??
Or is it just a case of the council hasn't said you can't park there, i.e. no yellow lines, no 'no parking' signs, etc?
If it's the latter then this probably applies to 90% of our roads.
I'm fairly certain it won't be the councils fault if someone decides to park dangerously.
Or is it just a case of the council hasn't said you can't park there, i.e. no yellow lines, no 'no parking' signs, etc?
If it's the latter then this probably applies to 90% of our roads.
I'm fairly certain it won't be the councils fault if someone decides to park dangerously.
Doubt it - the collision would be due to driving negligence. s
tty parking severely reduces visibility and shouldn't be tolerated, but as a driver "I know I couldn't see but why should I slow down because someone parked badly?" isn't a valid excuse for running someone over or crashing into another vehicle.
I know a street with a 90 degree blind bend halfway along, pedestrians need to cross at any spot along it, and residents/commuters engage in ridiculous parking. Most people crawl through at 5-10mph, but occasionally you see someone going faster and having a near miss (and in a few instances, crashes) due to rounding said bend and finding a car on their side of the road.
tty parking severely reduces visibility and shouldn't be tolerated, but as a driver "I know I couldn't see but why should I slow down because someone parked badly?" isn't a valid excuse for running someone over or crashing into another vehicle.I know a street with a 90 degree blind bend halfway along, pedestrians need to cross at any spot along it, and residents/commuters engage in ridiculous parking. Most people crawl through at 5-10mph, but occasionally you see someone going faster and having a near miss (and in a few instances, crashes) due to rounding said bend and finding a car on their side of the road.
I can relate to this actually.
My residential street is one way terrace houses that come to a give way across a busy road, Turning right across traffic to head south down the road, you're greeted to 3 parking bays cut into the pavement outside a 24/7 Sainsburys. The general size of vehicles these days, and that the vast majority of early AM traffic is work vans, it makes sighting the oncoming traffic absolutely impossible. The only way to get out is to edge across, and even then the majority of traffic just carry on and veer around you in rage that you dare protrude just a touch.
Plenty of speeding occurs in the mornings and I'm dreading the day old Dorris edges out and Barry Smith in his souped up S3 plows into her A pillar.
Surely there must be a duty from the council to provide safe roads? I suppose in asking that I may have answered my own question, has there been a suitable accident to raise the issue before? Hmmm.
My residential street is one way terrace houses that come to a give way across a busy road, Turning right across traffic to head south down the road, you're greeted to 3 parking bays cut into the pavement outside a 24/7 Sainsburys. The general size of vehicles these days, and that the vast majority of early AM traffic is work vans, it makes sighting the oncoming traffic absolutely impossible. The only way to get out is to edge across, and even then the majority of traffic just carry on and veer around you in rage that you dare protrude just a touch.
Plenty of speeding occurs in the mornings and I'm dreading the day old Dorris edges out and Barry Smith in his souped up S3 plows into her A pillar.
Surely there must be a duty from the council to provide safe roads? I suppose in asking that I may have answered my own question, has there been a suitable accident to raise the issue before? Hmmm.
Fairly sure someone sued East Sussex Council as they had not gritted a road and the decision was that even if they hadn’t they had no liability.
Now googled and here is the decision. https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld199900/ldj... Not strictly comparable but may give some clues
Now googled and here is the decision. https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld199900/ldj... Not strictly comparable but may give some clues
The offence of corporate manslaughter exists. The number and type of prosecutions under the act is very small. Even if found guilty of issuing a direct instruction which causes death, the penalties are financial and often payable over a prolonged period.
The chances of tracking actions or decisions through a council to a degree where a successful prosecution are likely must be close to absolute zero. The successful prosecutions have largely been successful due to direct breaches of other regulations. That is most likely the more successful route.
The chances of tracking actions or decisions through a council to a degree where a successful prosecution are likely must be close to absolute zero. The successful prosecutions have largely been successful due to direct breaches of other regulations. That is most likely the more successful route.
Wasn't too sure what I'd find in here, thought it would be someone sent out in a bad vehicle or ending up killed in machinery or something.
Would appear incredibly hard to achieve a successful outcome should the worst happen, possibly write to council to establish issues, decisions etc beforehand to assert concerns etc.. in the hopes it could help any later case.
Would appear incredibly hard to achieve a successful outcome should the worst happen, possibly write to council to establish issues, decisions etc beforehand to assert concerns etc.. in the hopes it could help any later case.
Drawweight said:
Would a prosecution stand if it were the owners of vehicles parked there that were prosecuted?
Inconsiderate parking isn't as offence as far as I know. Negotiating a blind spot is on the responsibility of the driver doing so.
Road Traffic Act Section 21 would probably cover parking on a blind bend, though it doesn't seem to be prosecuted very often.Inconsiderate parking isn't as offence as far as I know. Negotiating a blind spot is on the responsibility of the driver doing so.
"If a person in charge of a vehicle causes or permits the vehicle... to remain at rest on a road in such a position or in such condition or in such circumstances as to involve a danger of injury to other persons using the road, he is guilty of an offence."
It's also an offence to park in a manger which causes an unnecessary obstruction - whether or not double yellow lines are present.
Start here: https://www.crashmap.co.uk/. Is there a history of personal injury collisions?
Unfortunately, whether we like it or not, most Councils will only solve an issue after there is an accident history. Most Councils will receive 100s if not 1000s of requests a year from concerned residents who will all be equally as passionate about their issue.
Threats like "you need to do something before someone gets killed" or "you'll be responsible, and I'll tell everyone if you don't fix it" hold no sway when you've heard it 100s of times in the past.
The vast majority of accidents will be down to user error; the road layout may be a contributory factor but unlikely the sole reason.
If a fatality occurs, the coroner can issue a prevention of future death report requiring the council to solve it.
Post up a link so we can take a look.
Edit to add
The Road Traffic Act 1988, Section 39 imposes a statutory duty on every Highway Authority in England to promote and improve road safety by disseminating information or advice relating to the use of roads. Here is the text of the act.
The Act states that each local authority:
Must carry out studies into accidents arising out of the use of vehicles on roads, or parts
of roads, within their area;
Must, in light of such studies, take measures as appear to be appropriate to prevent
such accidents; and
In constructing new roads must take such measures as appear to be appropriate to
reduce the possibilities of such accidents when the roads come into use.
Unfortunately, whether we like it or not, most Councils will only solve an issue after there is an accident history. Most Councils will receive 100s if not 1000s of requests a year from concerned residents who will all be equally as passionate about their issue.
Threats like "you need to do something before someone gets killed" or "you'll be responsible, and I'll tell everyone if you don't fix it" hold no sway when you've heard it 100s of times in the past.
The vast majority of accidents will be down to user error; the road layout may be a contributory factor but unlikely the sole reason.
If a fatality occurs, the coroner can issue a prevention of future death report requiring the council to solve it.
Post up a link so we can take a look.
Edit to add
The Road Traffic Act 1988, Section 39 imposes a statutory duty on every Highway Authority in England to promote and improve road safety by disseminating information or advice relating to the use of roads. Here is the text of the act.
The Act states that each local authority:
Must carry out studies into accidents arising out of the use of vehicles on roads, or parts
of roads, within their area;
Must, in light of such studies, take measures as appear to be appropriate to prevent
such accidents; and
In constructing new roads must take such measures as appear to be appropriate to
reduce the possibilities of such accidents when the roads come into use.
Edited by Type R Tom on Thursday 14th December 17:26
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff