Like this site? Help us to make it better.

How to get information about a collision?

Can anyone tell me the best way to get hold of detailed information about a road traffic collision?

I think I need the STATS19 and related reports to get an idea of what happened.

It relates to *this* collision:

This is the scene:

But in July with leaves on the tree.


Matt W

If you're new please join in and if you have questions pop them below and the forum regulars will answer as best we can.

Add new comment


HoarseMann | 1 year ago

The google satellite imagery of this junction seems to show the path vehicles typically take when right-turning out of this junction, you can see some black tyre tracks and wearing of the road markings.

It also appears that the cyclist would have been riding downhill at the time, so could have been approaching the junction with some speed.

The give-way markings have been re-painted sometime between Jun 2021 and Feb 2022.

mattw replied to HoarseMann | 1 year ago

Thanks for the comment - all the detailed stuff is helping me to get to grips with process.

The STATS19 says that the cyclist was going From East To West, which is right to left on the satellite pics you clip, and quite sharply uphill. The road to the West is a deadend on the industrial estate, unless you follow some quite convoluted cycle paths that drop you somewhere completely separate from where the killed cyclist lived.

He lived in Sutton-in-Ashfield 2-3 miles to the East, which is consistent with that statement.

I had not noticed the tyre tracks, which is a good observation. The corner should not have been cut *that* tight because the lorry was an under-7.5t van not an artic, though he may have not seen the cyclist for not looking or the tree, and just straightlined it - which makes sense as it is downhill then up he other side of a valley on that road. The press reports were of the cyclist trapped under the lorry. 

I have no indication of the level of traffic, but just the side of the warehouse facing the road has at least 20 full size loading bays. And there are the same number round the back.

The repainting makes sense with the collision date of July 2021.

HoarseMann replied to mattw | 1 year ago

Another factor might be low sun. If this website is to be believed, sunrise on the day of the incident was 05:16 - one minute after the stated time of collision.

There's also a strava segment:

The quickest rider down that segment passed the collision location doing 35mph, so it's quite possible to get some speed up down there.

Tom_77 | 1 year ago
1 like

There will be an inquest, seems likely it will be reported here -

The inquest won't take place until legal proceding have finished though, so it could be a while.

Creakingcrank | 1 year ago
1 like


I think that's the STATS19. I don't know how you get access to related reports.

mattw replied to Creakingcrank | 1 year ago

That's really useful, thanks. Do they have all collisions?

So according to that the 3.5-7.5t lorry was turning right *out of* the entrance on journey for work, and ran the cyclist (on his way to work) down on the main carriageway. Cyclist on the carriageway, crossing from right to left.

There's a cycle/ped shared track, but given the position wrt town it will be an effective cycleway especially at 5.15am. Further along it was still being built, so it makes sense for him to have been on the carriageway.

But the X marks the spot is back from the junction, so suggests the cycleway was in use and the cyclist was crossing the side entrance a few m back from the road.

Hmmm. Interpretation depends on whether crossing the the side entrance road qualifies as cyclist on the 'main carriageway'.

Which all sounds more like a "didn't look" by the lorry driver.

Creakingcrank replied to mattw | 1 year ago

I think they have all collisions for the past 5 years or so, but it looks like they get them in sets from the DFT (maybe the previous years worth?) so may not be bang up to date.

Searchable ways in here:


I have no expertise in interpreting these forms, but I wonder if the "x-marks the spot" is an approximation. The cyclist's position is described as "on main cariageway, not in restricted lane", which suggests (to me) that the lorry driver pulled out on the cyclist. Collision points described as "front" on both vehicles so maybe cyclist had entered blind spot in front of cab when driver pulled out? (Obviously plenty of opportunities to see the cyclist before that moment). 

For a cyclist to cross from the shared use path across the entranceway in front of a truck would seem like an "odd" thing to do, while continuing on the main carriageway and expecting the truck driver to give way would be a normal thing to do.

Google streetview is poignant as later image shows flowers placed by the tree in left foreground. presumably in response to this incident, given the timing of the two pics.

mattw replied to Creakingcrank | 1 year ago

"Carriageway" is also the technical term for the part of the road where the vehicles go (ie not the pavement or a separate cycletrack, cut a cycle lane is on the carriageway).

So it's somewhat ambiguous and the carriageway of the side road is the road surface - depending if it is a road or not !

And none of these were adopted by the LHA at that point.

Also it was 5.15am so some slightly unusual circs.

I'd agree that the lorry pulled out onto the cyclist, but that could also be with the cyclist on the uncontrolled crossing which is part of the bent out cycle track, and would be 'on the carriageway' if he was crossing the road.

I'd be on the bollard protected cycle track - there is around a million square feet of warehousing down there, including a Coop distribution centre which measures 120m x 300m on plan on Google. And lorry traffic to match. And the road looks like a design speed of 40-45mph rather than the 30mph limit.

No prosecutions that I can find yet.

I do wonder how CCC pulled that off, and whether anyone has told Crashmap.

OnYerBike replied to mattw | 1 year ago

My interpretation of that report is that the cyclist was on the "main road" (i.e. Farmwell Lane) and not using the cycle path or crossing the side road (which would be a carriageway but not the "main carriageway"?) But I agree the reporting isn't very clear, especially if not familiar with the way terminology is used.

I have no idea what traffic is typically like on that road at that time of day, but if sufficiently light I can imagine I would be inclined to eschew the shared path and ride on the main road in order to avoid all those set-back crossings.

mattw replied to OnYerBike | 1 year ago
1 like

At the time of the accident the cycle track was not finished. And for around here it is pretty good for width and what is being built at present, but the sideroad crossings are poor as proved. 

As for traffic, at the time it went to the two sets of warehouses, which have something getting on for 500 parked cars in Google Earth, plus lorries and I assume 2 or 3 shifts.

It's fairly busy - the whole area (apart from the entrance to the road in which is a mile away) is in Derbyshire, and they are developing big industry right up to the border including MacArthur Glen Outlet Centre (not accessible from that road) which has 3 million visitors a year and just put in another 500 parking spaces. Last time I checked their cycle infra was 4 wheelbender stands.

That road is the A38, and there is no way across by bike except the double traffic island junction shown. That area has changed massively quickly recently.


Creakingcrank replied to mattw | 1 year ago

On the data - it looks like the STATS19 info is in the public domain. You can download it from this page, for example:

It's not very user-friendly. You need 3 tables (Casualties, Vehicles and Accidents) and you need to understand the form to interpret it, which is where Crashmap and Cyclestreets et al have the opportuntiy to add value, whether for profit or campaigning purposes.

mattw | 1 year ago



Latest Comments