Michael Shuttleworth

13  September 2022 

On  behalf of Senior Coroner 
West Yorkshire (Eastern) 
Coroner's Office and Court 
71  Northgate 
Wakefield WF 1 3BS 

Mercedes-Benz 

Mercedes-Benz Vans 
UK Limited 

Your reference,;_24360 

Re:  Inquest touching the death of Michael SHUTTLEWORTH, (deceased) 

Dear 

We write in response to the Coroner's Office and Court letter dated 25th July 2022, relating 
to the above reference, following the inquest touching the death of Michael Shuttleworth 
(deceased}. Mercedes-Benz treats all requests of this nature with the highest of priorities and 
we were sorry to learn about the incident.  Mercedes-Benz has thoroughly investigated this 
matter and our response is provided below. 

The vehicle affected by the facts of the case was delivered by Mercedes-Benz AG  (formerly 
Daimler AG)  ("MBAG") as a so-called "wind runner"  or "cowl" with a windscreen and mounted 
A-pillar. This is a "rolling chassis" to which the main drive components (engine and drive 
train)  are attached only ("rolling chassis", see Figure  1). The  sales code used for this is "F24 -
Cowl with windshield high" (see Figure 2). 

Figure  1: Cowl with windshield 

Mercedes-Benz Vans UK Limited  I Tongwell  I  Milton Keynes  I MK! 5 SBA  IT +44 (0)1908 245000 I www.mbvans.co.uk 

Registered in England and Wales.  10304278 Registered Office 

@ and Mercedes-Benz are trademarks of Mercedes-Benz Group AG. 

 
 
 
 
 The chassis supplied by MBAG was delivered with exterior mirror holders only to UPS and without 
exterior mirrors (see  Figure  2). 

FIN WDB 670323 2N 148699 

VeOoc 

Status Delivered 

Special equipment codes 

Sp• elal 

=~m• nt  0.1l9n•tlon 

number 

Afl 

AK> 

AJ4 

802 

816 

865 

876 

C43 

C49 

CL6 

EO-' 

E30 

EE? 

F41 

FSS 

F62 

F77 

F82 

GC4 

Axle ratio i •  3,636 

Rur axle H 2 . S.6 t w1thc1ow-n Y1,hffl 312 

Front axle 2.St 

Anti-block system (ABS) for bra~H 

Brake hydraulic 2-c1rcuit$/compr.•&1r 2~cfrcults 

Compruud•air dryer. heate (1-ch.amber sys) 

Olsttlbutor fming fOf auxiliary consume-rs 

Stabilizer rear a,d~ ,~nforct<I under frame 

Front axle stabilizer r•mf. f. extr  h1oh loaid 

Slttring L$4 

EIKtr1c tqutpment 24 V /  staner 24 V 

Batt~ main switch smgJf--PO!e-

BattOflts. 2 x 12V/100Ah 

Cowl with win<lshltld high  ] 

W1ndscreen. lam1n111,d glass, 9re-e-n, 30 "\ 

Rur view mirror btacktt txttndtd 

Rear view mirror heatable 

Sound absorption additional 

Cowl \ltfSIOO short. find 

Goa,box G SH/ 6.29-0.78 

S68 

S91 

TE4 

V28 

V45 

X36 

X42 

X57 

X89 

X92 

Automatic seat belt driver 

Deletion. c<Hlriver's seat 

Weight variant 7.491 (2,515.6) 

Undersea! 

Floor cover mg. drive, compartment 

Name plate ror ruse box ,n English 

Plat es /  booklets english 

Noise reduct1on to CM 92197 

Set or door locks 

Deletion, company plate (Mercedes-Benz) 

(xc1 

coc papers. incomplete  ] 

XMO 

xzo 

Y44 

Y45 

209 

Facelift 

Model generation o 

Warning triangle 

Warning lamp 

Scope of delivery for UPS integral box body 

Figure  2:  Selection of Sales codes/Special equipment codes 

The  delivery from MBAG was of an incomplete and not roadworthy vehicle chassis for which 
further modifications are required  before being registered and placed on  the public highway. 
The  incomplete chassis (here specifically a "cowl") is considered an unfinished preliminary 
product, which is  then extensively  "converted" (see example Figures 3 and 4) by a third 
party body builder ("BB"), in this case, Firma Sommer GmbH, Kleine ZiegelohstraBe 8, 06636 
Laucha an der Unstrut (https://www.sommer-online.de/index.php?id=3& L=1). 

The  BB would then convert the cowl to become a roadworthy, homologated/registered 
vehicle and ready for end-customer. 

Example of a UPS Vario 

 Figure 3:  Example UPS Vario 

MBAG supplied the chassis/"cowl" as ordered to UPS. UPS's nominated BB  (Firma Sommer 
GmbH) carried out  further construction/modification of the cowl  independently of MBAG, on 
behalf of it customer UPS. 

The  BB makes significant modifications and changes, especially in  the area relevant to the 
case (marked in red)  of the A-pillar (outside mirror) and the entry area/door portal. 

Figure 4: Example UPS Vario 

Scope of certification: 

In this case, MBAG only delivered the certified "cowl". The  Certificate of Conformity (CoC) 
papers ex MBAG are therefore incomplete, this is indicated by the code "XC 1 - COC papers, 
incomplete" (see Figure 2). 

The attached CoC paper from MBAG shows that the chassis/cowl required additional type 
approval for registration ("Another type approval is required for registration"). See also 
Appendix  1. 

The  significantly modified A-pillar, the driver and front passenger sliding door and the exterior 
mirrors were not part of the supplied chassis/cowl by MBAG, and therefore were not 
certified by M BAG 

Conclusion: 

The BB changes the product significantly through structural modifications in line with its 
customer's (UPS)  specifications and takes responsibility for the same. 

There was no development or cooperation between the BB  (Firma Sommer) and MBAG 
relating to any structural modification carried on  the MBAG supplied chassis/cowl in this 
case.  Further, MBAG did not modify, inspect or homologate the complete vehicle created by 
the BB. 

 As the entity that converts the chassis/cowl into a complete vehicle and placing the entire 
vehicle on the market, Firma Sommer is responsible for certification-related conformity and 
roadworthiness of the completed vehicle, along with ensuring compliance with any regulatory 
requirements for direct and indirect vision. 

We  hope the detail contained within our response assists the Coroner's Office and Court 
reach a satisfactory conclusion to this matter. If the Coroner's Office and Court requires any 
further information from Mercedes-Benz on  this matter, we would  be more than willing to 
assist. 

Yours sincerely 

anaging Director 

Mercedes-Benz Vans UK Limited 

Attachment: 
Appendix 1 - Enclosed Certificate of Conformity (CoC) for the vehicle in question 

Mercedes-Benz Vario 813D chassis cowl Long 7 .49t; registration YG 13 VCO  ("the Vehicle") 
Chassis number: WDB6703232N 148699 
Production date: 27.03.2013 
Registration date:  19.06.2013 
Incident date: 05.11.2020

HM Area Coroner Longstaff 
Coroner’s Service West Yorkshire (Eastern) Area 
71 Northgate 
Wakefield 
West Yorkshire 
WF1 3BS 

Clyde & Co Claims LLP 

Chancery Place 

50 Brown Street 

Manchester 

M2 2JT 

United Kingdom 

Telephone: +44 (0) 161 829 6400 

Facsimile: +44 (0) 161 829 6401 

www.clydeco.com 

Our Ref 
10246488 

Your Ref 
24360 

Date: 
14 September 2022 

Dear Mr Longstaff 

Inquest touching upon the death of Michael Shuttleworth 

We are instructed on behalf of UPS Limited (“UPS” or “the Company”) and write on its behalf in 
response to your report dated 22 July 2022. 

Firstly, UPS would like to set out its condolences to Mr Shuttleworth’s friends and family.  

Thank  you  for  providing  the  inquest  disclosure,  including  the  Forensic  Collision  Investigator’s 
(“FCI”)  report  which  sets  out  the  background  to  the  case  and  the  officer’s  view  around  the 
primary causative factor1, and the contributing factor of conspicuity2, which are unrelated to the 
points raised by the report, and recognised in the two findings of fact made at the inquest.  

We note the matters of concern set out in your report and deal with these in turn  below. The 
first  point  UPS  was  made  aware  of  them  was  upon  receipt  of  your  report.  Had  UPS  been 
afforded the opportunity to make representations prior to the issuing of the report we trust the 
below information, which was in place when the report was issued, would have addressed the 
concerns raised.  

1.  Driver’s dismissal and evidence  

The  driver  of  the  vehicle  was  dismissed  following  an  internal  disciplinary  process.  The 
dismissal was for the following reasons: 

1.  Reckless disregard of Health & Safety precautions, procedures and regulations; and 

2.  A wilful failure to follow Company policies, procedures and regulations. 

1 I consider the primary causation in this collision to be the pedestrian's decision to not utilise the pelican crossing 
point correctly, which would have provided a safe and controlled passage to cross the carriageway. And to enter a 
live traffic lane, where vehicles were already in motion, at a time when it was not safe to do so (paragraph 18.5 – 
FCI report) 
2 Paragraph 18.6 Ibid. 

Clyde & Co Claims LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales under number OC344148 and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation 
Authority.  A list of members is available for inspection at its registered office The St Botolph Building, 138 Houndsditch, London EC3A 7AR. Clyde & Co Claims LLP uses the 
word 'partner' to refer to a member of the LLP, or an employee or consultant with equivalent standing and qualifications. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 It  was  found  that  in  his  initial  report  he  had  failed  to  disclose  that  he  collided  with  a 
pedestrian, or the seriousness of the collision. This only became apparent later from media 
and social media reports.  

Vehicle 

We note the Police Vehicle Examiner has confirmed there were no faults or defects with the 
vehicle involved in this tragic collision3. 

All  vehicles  operated  by  UPS  are  built  and  homologated  to  the  respective  governing 
countries requirements, and regulations at the time of manufacture. Additionally vehicles in 
the UK undergo an annual (MOT) inspection to ensure their safety and compliance.  

Vehicles  undergo  regular  maintenance  to  ensure  they  are  maintained  to  a  high  level  of 
safety  standards.  This  is  a  requirement  of  UPS  processes  and  in  accordance  with  the 
Company’s  Operator’s  Licence  issued  by  the  Traffic  Commissioner.  Vehicles  of  this  type 
(N2 (3.5T+)), undergo inspections every 9 weeks. 

UPS consistently reviews all vehicle specifications to maintain and exceed safety standards 
for the safety of staff and members of the public. 

UPS  operated  vehicles  are  selected  to  provide  maximum  visibility  to  drivers.  This  is  a 
continually  developing  concept  as  new  products  and  systems  are  brought  to  market.  The 
vehicle in question (2013 manufacture) does provide a high degree of direct visibility to the 
driver in contrast to other vehicles in this vehicle category which were manufactured around 
the same time (typically box van configurations of higher chassis and cab configurations).  

Despite this it is inevitable that designs will lead to blind spots in all types of vehicles on the 
road. While UPS works with manufacturers to reduce these as far as possible, a blind spot 
is  unfortunately  not  something  that  can  simply  be  designed  out  of  a  large  vehicle  of  this 
nature. UPS continues to improve the safety features on its vehicles and has implemented 
further ADAS features (see further below) that were not commercially available at the date 
of manufacture of this vehicle. 

A  key feature  of the mirror design  is to  ensure the maximum  available  visibility  to  drivers. 
This is focused on the primary risks in the environment UPS vehicles operate in which are 
mainly urban areas. The importance of being able to reverse safely (where this cannot be 
avoided),  and  to  provide  as  much  visibility  as  possible  of  vulnerable  road  users 
(pedestrians and cyclists in the vicinity of the vehicles in such environments), is paramount 
to the Company’s day to day operations.  

In addition to multiple mirrors, the vehicle also included a lower window section integrated 
on the passenger side to further reduce the potential blind spot as well as additional mirrors 
to provide greater visibility of pedestrians and cyclists alike. 

2.  Forensic Collision Investigator’s (“FCI”) evidence 

This point raises the same issue as that above. Please see response to 1. As set out there 
UPS sets out to ensure its vehicles are as safe as possible for its employees and members 
of  the  public  alike.  At  the  time  of  manufacture  the  vehicle  had  safety  features  above  and 
beyond  industry  standard  and  the  vehicle  had  better  visibility  than  many  vehicles  in  its 
class. 

We  also  respectfully  highlight  the  officer’s  comments  from  his  reconstruction  that  the 
mirrors (a critical safety feature for when the vehicle is on the road and reversing which is 

3 Paragraph 13.15 Ibid. 

 
 
 
 
 
 used during journeys and cannot simply be removed) may have masked Mr Shuttleworth4 
and the nature of the reconstruction was just a guide…[to the]… possible views available, 
as the vehicle and pedestrian could have been in a different position5. 

3.   FCI evidence on A post and mirror assembly 

Please see above at 1 which addresses the points raised under this section.  

The  Mercedes  Vario  in  question  is  no  longer  built  by  Mercedes  and  we  understand 
production ceased in approximately 2013. 

4.  FCI Reconstruction  

Please see above at 1 which addresses the point raised under this section.  

5.  Driver Aids 

Ahead of mainstream technology at the time, these vehicles, and in general almost all UPS 
package delivery vehicles have a rear camera to increase visibility.  

Current  vehicles  are  fitted  with  additional  Advanced  Driver  Assistance  Systems  (ADAS) 
which were not commercially available at the time of this particular vehicle’s manufacture in 
2013. This includes a platform with Automatic Emergency Braking to further reduce the risk 
of collisions, traction control, forward collision warning and lane departure warning.  

6.  Driver Assessments 

Upon joining the Company, new drivers attend a driver training school. This is a two week 
course  including  both  classroom  and  practical  in-vehicle  training  and  assessments.  After 
completing  training  drivers  are  closely  monitored  by  a  supervisor  for  22  working  days, 
during  which  time  the  new  driver  must  complete  various  tasks  to  the  satisfaction  of  their 
supervisor to be deemed competent.  

Drivers are then subject to, as a minimum, annual assessments of their driving. This can be 
undertaken  more  frequently  if  required,  subject  to  the  score  received,  or  concerns  being 
raised.  Following  a collision  a driver  will  not  be  allowed  to operate  a UPS  vehicle prior  to 
the completion of such an assessment.  

The  assessment  is  a  thorough  review  involving  the  assessor  shadowing  the  driver  for  a 
typical  (usually  8  hour)  shift  reviewing  the  standard  of  driving  under  various  conditions. 
Feedback  is  provided  as  the  assessor  goes  along.  The  ability  to  complete  these 
assessments  annually  was  impacted  during  the  pandemic  given  the  close  proximity  (less 
than 2 metres) assessors and drivers would be operating in over the prolonged assessment 
period. 

The Driver was assessed in September of 2019. Due to the impact of the pandemic he was 
1 month  outside  of  the 12  month reassessment  period.  The assessment  lasted  11  hours. 
This  included  a  period  of  approximately  1  ½  hours  of  the  assessor  demonstrating  good 
driving practice.  

4 Paragraph 17.2 
5 Paragraph 17.5 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 The assessment covered the following topics (please note we have included examples of 
the  points  covered  under  each  section  as  opposed  to  each  and  every  criteria assessed). 
Items  3  –  7  are  the  UPS  5  Seeing  Habits  and  key  phrases  associated  with  them.  These 
are  regularly  trained  out  to  all  drivers  in  pre-work  communication  meetings  sharing  best 
practice and safety activities. These are set out on a Driver Card provided to all drivers and 
kept with them so it is available as a reference during the day, as well as being prominently 
displayed on posters around the depot.  

1.  Pre-trip inspection of the vehicle; 

a.  Thorough  pre-use  check  of  vehicle  to  include  checking  of  any  defects  before 
leaving depot – leaks, tyres, lights, brakes, signals, seatbelts, adjusting mirrors 
etc. 

2.  Engine, clutch and transmission; 

a.  Use of seat belt, gear selection and changing, refrains from over revving and / or 

rolling back etc. 

3.  Aim high in steering – Find a safe path ahead; 

a.  Looking  ahead  during  travel,  correct  positioning  of  vehicle,  driving  position, 
checking  traffic  and  turning  when  clear,  smooth  safe  turns  properly  positioned, 
not cutting corners etc. 

4.  Get the big picture – Stay back and see it all; 

a.  Monitoring traffic ahead, proper spacing, adjusts driving to traffic conditions etc.  

5.  Keep your eyes moving – Scan, don’t stare; 

a.  Frequent  mirror  checks,  proper  approach  to  pedestrian  crossings,  observing 
traffic signals  and signs,  proper  checks (mirrors and windows)  at  intersections, 
use of handbrake etc.  

6.  Leave yourself an out = Be prepared, expect the unexpected; 

a.  Leaving  sufficient  space  to  other  vehicles,  looking  in  appropriate  directions  at 
intersection,  selection  of  correct  path,  adjusting  speed  to  road,  weather  and 
traffic conditions, reversing etc. 

7.  Make sure they see you – don’t gamble, use horn, lights and signals; 

a.  Vehicle  checks  post-deliveries,  signalling,  lights,  stopping  and  parking,  use  of 

mirrors etc, 

8.  Post-trip; 

a.  Exterior checks, brakes, fuel, handover records etc. 

9.  Pedestrians and cyclists; 

a.  Caution around parked vehicles, eye contact etc. 

Following the assessment the assessor provides feedback to the driver on any areas identified 
where improvements may be made. It is wholly incorrect to suggest no feedback is provided. 
On this assessment the assessor covered the following: 

•  Use of and benefits of completing report of accident card; 

•  Seat belt use; 

 
 
 
 •  Hand positioning on the steering wheel; 

•  Turning position – lane to lane; 

•  Spacing at traffic lights; 

•  Benefits of counting to 3 after vehicle in front moves off before proceeding; 

•  Reversing and use of horn where appropriate if conditions change; 

•  Leaving vehicle in 1st gear when parked; 

•  Visual check in front of the vehicle before moving off after drop off; and 

•  Use of hazard lights when parked in certain circumstances.   

As part of the process the assessor: 

•  Reviewed  the  tachograph  record  of  the  driver  to  confirm  compliance  with  drivers 

hours requirements; 

•  Reviewed the collision reporting requirements with the driver; 

•  Conducted an eye sight test; and 

•  Reviewed the Distracted Driving Procedure. 

The Driver signed to confirm undertaking the assessment and receipt of the advice provided. 

Part  of  the  process  included  training  and  assessment  on  the  UPS  Space  and  Visibility 
Procedure.  This  involves  a  twofold  assessment,  firstly  the  observed  ride  along  (75%  of  the 
score), followed by a Q&A session on proper driving practice and procedure (25%). The driver 
received  a  91%  score  indicating  annual  assessments.  Repeat  assessments  are  scheduled 
based on driver score and can be scheduled anything from annually (highest scoring drivers), 6 
monthly, quarterly, monthly or even next day in event of the poorest performers. 

The  Driver  had  also  completed  Certificate  of  Professional  Competence  training  during  his 
employment.  Legal  requirements  specify  7  hours  of  training  every  5  years  to  review  the 
certificate.  The  Driver  in  question  had  completed  35  hours  of  training  over  the  preceding  11 
years, well above and beyond these requirements. 

Thank you for taking the time to consider this response.  

Yours faithfully 

Clyde & Co Claims LLP