Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2021

Sarah Lewis

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2021-0251, written 20 Jul 2021. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report20 Jul 2021
Reference2021-0251
DeceasedSarah Lewis
CoronerDebbie Rookes
Coroner areaCounty of Dorset
CategoryRoad (Highways Safety) related deaths · Other related deaths
Sourcejudiciary.uk record · original PDF
Responses published1

The report

Text extracted from the PDF text layer. Reproduced verbatim, including the scan's own layout.

19 July 2021 

REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS 

THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO:  Grant Shapps, Secretary of State for Transport 

1 CORONER 

I am Debbie Rookes, Assistant Coroner for The County of Dorset 

2 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. 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2009/25/schedule/5/paragraph/7 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/1629/part/7/made 

3 INVESTIGATION and INQUEST 

The Coroner's Office for the County of Dorset, Bournemouth Town Hall, Bournemouth, BH2 6DY 

 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 On 25 November 2020 I commenced an investigation into the death of Sarah Lewis. 

The investigation concluded at the end of the inquest on 19 July 2021. 

The conclusion of the inquest was Road Traffic Collision. 

1a Multiple injuries 

1b 

1c 

II   Fluoxetine Toxicity 

4 CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH 

On 16 November 2020, Sarah Lewis drove her car to Kennedy's Garage, Lynch Lane, Weymouth, 
for an MOT. She was standing on the pavement at the junction of Lynch Lane and McKay Close 
waiting for a taxi. A large goods vehicle was being reversed from Lynch Lane into McKay Close 
when Ms Lewis started crossing the road behind the lorry. The lorry had its reverse warning 
lights on and its reversing alarm was clearly audible over the background noise of the industrial 
estate but it is unclear why Ms Lewis did not hear or see these. The lorry driver did not see Ms 
Lewis in his mirrors. The lorry struck Ms Lewis at approximately 09.45 on 16 November 2020 
causing multiple injuries which were fatal. A post mortem examination revealed a level of 
Fluoxetine in excess of the therapeutic range and it is unclear what affect this may have had on 
Ms Lewis. 

5 CORONER’S CONCERNS 

The Coroner's Office for the County of Dorset, Bournemouth Town Hall, Bournemouth, BH2 6DY 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 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) A Large Goods Vehicle was being driven which had reverse warning lights and a reversing 
alarm. The driver was assisted by 7 mirrors. A pedestrian was stood on the pavement and she 
was not seen by the driver. It is likely that the driver was checking his nearside mirror or the 
road around him when the pedestrian stepped out behind the reversing lorry which resulted in a 
complete blind spot once she was behind the vehicle. 

(2) The evidence I heard is that it is not mandatory for Large Goods Vehicles to be fitted with a 
camera at the rear of the vehicle to assist drivers and prevent this blind spot. A lot of drivers 
complete journeys alone without a banksman to assist them in safely reversing. 

(3) There is no legal requirement for vehicles to have a rear camera and yet this may prevent 
future deaths. At the very least it would prevent a large number of accidents. 

6 ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN 

In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I believe you Grant Shapps 
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 14 September 2021. 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. 

8 COPIES and PUBLICATION 

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

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. 

9 

The Coroner's Office for the County of Dorset, Bournemouth Town Hall, Bournemouth, BH2 6DY 

 
 
 
    
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
     
 
 
 20 July 2021 

Signature 

Debbie S Rookes 

Assistant Coroner for The County of Dorset 

The Coroner's Office for the County of Dorset, Bournemouth Town Hall, Bournemouth, BH2 6DY

Responses

1 response published against this report on judiciary.uk. A response is a body's written reply to the coroner's concerns; publication is at the discretion of the Chief Coroner's office, so an absent response does not mean nobody replied.

Response from Department for Transport (PDF)
Department for Transport 
Great Minster House 
33 Horseferry Road 
London 
SW1P 4DR 

Web Site: www.gov.uk/dft 

13 October 2021 

Deborah Rookes 
Assistant Coroner 
The Coroner's Office for the County of Dorset 
Bournemouth Town Hall 
Bournemouth 
BH2 6DY 

Dear Mrs Rookes, 

Thank you for your report dated 19 July 2021 following the conclusion of 
your inquest into the death of Sarah Kathleen Elaine Lewis, under 
paragraph 7, Schedule 5, of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 and 
Regulations 28 and 29 of the Coroners (Investigations) Regulations 
2013.  The report was received in the Department for Transport (DfT) on 
25 August 2021. 

I am replying on behalf of the DfT as Head of Vehicle Engineering in 
International Vehicle Standards, which is the lead division on vehicle 
construction standards. 

During the inquest you heard evidence that the driver of the Large 
Goods Vehicle (LGV) had reverse warning lights with a reversing alarm 
and was assisted by seven mirrors. You also heard that it is not a legal 
requirement for an LGV to have a rear facing camera, which you believe 
may be effective in preventing future deaths. 

All new vehicle types need to be approved prior to their registration and 
use on UK roads to demonstrate that they comply with a range of 
technical construction standards.  The requirements for indirect vision 
are set out in the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe 
(UNECE) Regulation 46 which permits mirrors or camera-monitor 
systems (CMS) to be fitted to the vehicle to satisfy this requirement.  The 
indirect vision devices fitted to comply with Regulation 46 do not provide 
a view to the driver directly behind their vehicle. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 The DfT has been working at international level to develop appropriate 
requirements to improve vision for drivers around LGVs.  This work 
includes a reversing detection system using cameras, sensors or a 
combination of these to enable the driver to be aware of an obstacle or 
person directly behind their vehicle.  The technical requirements for the 
system have been finalised and were formally agreed earlier this year. 

Following the UK leaving the European Union, a new approval system 
for vehicles being registered for use in Great Britain is being developed. 
A call for evidence is planned later this year to gather views on the 
inclusion of a wide range of technologies that are becoming available, 
including reversing detection systems.  The outcome will inform 
decisions on future legislation to require these technologies to be fitted 
to new vehicles. We will hold and record your observations on the use of 
reversing camera systems within the responses to the call for evidence.  

I hope you find this information helpful and are reassured that the DfT is  
engaged in the development of improved vehicle requirements, and that 
consideration is being given to mandating these to improve protection for 
vulnerable road users. 

Head of Vehicle Engineering 
International Vehicle Standards

Related reports

Other reports by Debbie Rookes

See all →

More reports categorised “Road (Highways Safety) related deaths”

See all →

Track Road (Highways Safety) related deaths

See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching Road (Highways Safety) related deaths, and how often a new one appears.

What would an alert for this have sent me? Search the full text

Free to try — the preview shows the real matches and how many arrived in the last 12 months. Your first email alert is free.

These reports are published by the Chief Coroner's office at judiciary.uk and are © Crown copyright. The text here is reproduced from the published PDF so it can be searched. If something on this page is wrong, or you are a person named in it and want it reviewed, email drcjar@gmail.com and we will act promptly.