Mixed messages contributed to road death

Quiet streets

In the early hours of March 5 2007, a Brighton refuse truck driver set off on his round as usual. The vehicle was fitted with rear-facing CCTV and a reversing alarm. Next to the driver in the cab was a trained banksman who could assist with reversing manoeuvres. At 6.20am, whilst reversing on one of Brighton’s narrow pedestrianised streets, he struck and ran over a member of the public. He realised this when he saw the body of 61-year-old Anne Smith lying about three metres in front of the vehicle. But how could this have happened?

The immediate causes

The first mistake made by the company was in allowing the vehicle to go out with a defective CCTV system. Without the CCTV the vehicle had a blind spot which was four metres wide and 50 metres long. However, in itself the lack of CCTV wouldn’t have caused the accident given the other precautions in place. The second problem was the time of day. The company had a policy of not using audible reversing alarms between 11pm and 7am because of the noise nuisance caused. The practice of turning off or muting reversing alarms during unsociable hours is encouraged by many councils, so on balance this decision was probably the right one. The fatal error was made by the driver in not making use of the banksman. Given the time of day, the busy central location and the fact that the CCTV wasn’t working, it’s surprising that his reversing assistant remained in the cab.

Root cause

In court, Team Waste (Southern) Ltd (T) said that it had a formal policy that all reversing of refuse vehicles would be carried out with the assistance of a banksman.

But the HSE found that there were inconsistencies in the implementation of its policy. At weekends it allowed one-man crews to operate, when by necessity the drivers had to reverse without a banksman. The drivers therefore received the message that the practice was justifiable; it was thought that this mixed message had been a significant cause of the driver’s poor decision on the day.

Findings

The company pleaded not guilty to the charges, but their inconsistent practices were sufficient to lead to their conviction. T was fined £250,000 for breaching s.3 of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 with costs of £50,000.

Tip 1. Try to keep your safety rules clear and simple. But if like T you find that you need to vary them, make sure that it’s still safe. For example, T could have stated that reversing without a banksman was only acceptable at weekends when collecting from workplaces which weren’t occupied and only when rear-facing CCTV was in working order.

Tip 2. If you know that the work is going to involve reversing HGVs in built-up areas, make it a policy that a banksman is always used. Technology alone isn’t enough where there may be disabled or elderly people present.

Tip 3. Where CCTV and reversing alarms are fitted, make sure that you keep them in good repair at all times. Be prepared for emergency repairs by keeping essential spare parts on the vehicle.