Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2024
Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2024-0709, written 24 Dec 2024. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.
| Date of report | 24 Dec 2024 |
|---|---|
| Reference | 2024-0709 |
| Deceased | Daniel Isaacs |
| Coroner | Nathanael Hartley |
| Coroner area | Nottingham and Nottinghamshire |
| Category | Road (Highways Safety) related deaths |
| Source | judiciary.uk record · original PDF |
| Responses published | 1 |
Text extracted from the PDF text layer. Reproduced verbatim, including the scan's own layout.
REGULATION 28: REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO: 1. Secretary of State for Transport 1 CORONER I am Nathanael Hartley, assistant coroner for the coroner area of Nottingham and Nottinghamshire. 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. 3 INVESTIGATION and INQUEST On 16th October 2024 an inquest was opened into the death of Daniel Isaacs, aged 41. The inquest concluded on 16th December 2024. I made a determination at inquest that he died as a result of a road traffic collision. 4 CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH Daniel Isaacs was travelling along Carlton Road, Nottingham, when he lost control of his electric scooter. He was dismounted from the vehicle and collided with the road surface causing a serious head injury. He was not wearing a helmet at the time of his collision. He received first aid and treatment at hospital but died as a result of the head injury on 24th May 2024 at the Queen’s Medical Centre in Nottingham. 5 CORONER’S CONCERNS During the course of the inquest the evidence revealed matters giving rise to concern. In my opinion there is a risk that future deaths could occur unless action is taken. In the circumstances it is my statutory duty to report to you. The MATTERS OF CONCERN are as follows. – There is no requirement that riders of electric scooters wear helmets. Due to the expectation of their use on the road, and their vulnerability, there is a risk of death to riders of electric scooters and bicycles not wearing protective headwear who are involved in collisions, even at lower speeds. 6 ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I believe you have the power to take such action. 1 7 YOUR RESPONSE You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of this report, namely by 18 February, 2025. 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: 1. Daniel’s family. I have sent a copy of the report and the response to the Nottinghamshire Police Serious Collision Investigation Unit as I believe they may find it useful or of interest. I am also under a duty to send the Chief Coroner a copy of your response and all interested persons who, in my opinion, should receive it. I may also send a copy of your response to any person who I believe may find it useful or of interest. The Chief Coroner may publish either or both in a complete or redacted or summary form. She may send a copy of this report to any person who she 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 Dated: 24 December 2024 Nathanael Hartley HM Assistant Coroner For Nottingham and Nottinghamshire 2
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.
From the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State Great Minster House 33 Horseferry Road London SW1P 4DR Web site: www.gov.uk/dft Our Ref: 17 February 2025 Nathanael Hartley HM Assistant Coroner for Nottingham and Nottinghamshire Nottingham City Council, The Council House Old Market Square, Nottingham NG1 2DT Dear Nathanael, Thank you for the email of 27 December enclosing a Regulation 28 Report for the death of Daniel Isaacs following the conclusion of your inquest on 16 December 2024. I am grateful to you for sharing your concerns about there being no requirement for e-scooter and bicycle riders to not wear a helmet. This is a tragic incident, and our thoughts are with the family and friends of Daniel Isaacs. The use of privately e-scooters on our roads remains illegal. They are only legal to use in the Government run e-scooter trials, for which there was not one in Nottingham and Nottinghamshire at the time of this collision. The Government guidance for e-scooter rental trials strongly recommends all users should wear helmets and urges all e-scooter trial operators to consider providing helmets or incentivising their use. However, the purpose of the trials is to inform future regulations on e-scooters and no decisions on this have been made. I have just commissioned a second evaluation of the e-scooter trials, which will look at the impact of helmet provision and uptake amongst e-scooter users and I will ensure we consider a full range of evidence, including international comparisons and a public consultation, before any regulations on the use of e-scooters come into force. On the matter of helmets for cycles, the question is complex. The Government must carefully balance the safety benefits of mandating helmets against the potential disbenefits. The Department carefully looked at the case for making helmet wearing mandatory in a comprehensive Cycling and Walking Safety Review in 2018 (www.gov.uk/government/speeches/governments-response-to-the-cycling- walking-investment-strategy-safety-review). The Review concluded that helmets(cid:3031)should(cid:3031)continue to be strongly recommended for people who cycle, especially for children, but that they should remain a matter of personal choice rather than becoming a legal requirement. It said that the safety benefits of mandating cycle helmets for people who cycle would be likely to be outweighed by the fact that this would put some people off cycling, thereby reducing the wider health and environmental benefits. Enforcement would also be unlikely to be a priority for the police.(cid:3031)(cid:3031) However, as I consider future regulations on micromobility devices including e-scooters, I will continue to ensure we look holistically across the piece as road safety remains at the core of the Department’s work. Yours sincerely, MINISTER FOR LOCAL TRANSPORT
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.