Fatal accident at Mott's Lane level crossing, Witham, Essex - 24 January 2013

[whole diary]

[Chris from Nailsea]

From the Rail Accident Investigation Branch website:

The RAIB^▸ (Rail Accident Investigation Branch) is investigating the fatal accident that occurred at Mott^s Lane footpath and bridleway crossing, near Witham, Essex, on Thursday 24 January 2013. At about 17:37 hrs, a man who was crossing the railway on foot, pushing a bicycle, was struck by a train travelling from London (Liverpool Street) to Norwich, and killed instantly.


The level crossing at Mott's Lane

The crossing, which is over two tracks, links a residential area with an industrial estate. Lights, which show steady red or green, are provided to inform crossing users whether it is safe to cross. The RAIB^s preliminary examination has found that these lights worked correctly in respect of the train that was involved in the accident. However, the crossing has a history of misuse by members of the public.

The RAIB^s investigation will identify the sequence of events which led to the accident and any factors which may have influenced the actions of the user. It will also examine:
- the design, maintenance and operation of the crossing and its associated signalling;
- risk management; and
- the history of the crossing, including previous accidents and near-misses, and the reasons why the crossing has been subject to misuse.

The RAIB's investigation is independent of any investigation by the safety authority (the Office of Rail Regulation) or the British Transport Police.

The RAIB will publish a report, including any recommendations to improve safety, at the conclusion of its investigation. This report will be available on the RAIB website.

[JayMac]

The RAIB^▸ (Rail Accident Investigation Branch) has released its report into this incident.

http://www.raib.gov.uk/publications/investigation_reports/reports_2014/report012014.cfm

The RAIB has made four recommendations, addressed to Network Rail, which cover:

• the review and reduction of long waiting times at automatic level crossings;
• the design and checking of software which is used for automatic route setting in signalling control centres;
• minimising the effect of local variations in the way trains are signalled that may affect the length of the periods during which red lights are displayed at level crossings; and
• modification of risk management processes for crossings with miniature stop lights to include allowance for the length of time that the red lights show.

[Chris from Nailsea]

From the Essex Chronicle:

Cyclist's level crossing death was preventable, inquest hears


upgrade: The Motts Lane crossing in Witham now has a bridge

The death of a cyclist who was struck by a train travelling at 100mph on a dangerous level crossing could have been prevented if a new bridge had been built sooner and signals were operated correctly, an inquest heard.

Michal Majzner 30, of Pennyroyal Crescent, Witham, died after being hit at around 5.30pm on the Motts Lane crossing in the town as he headed to his factory night shift at the Eastway Industrial Area on January 24 last year.

The Polish national had moved to Witham in 2007 with his partner and the couple had a daughter in 2010. Both worked at the Village Glass factory.

In a statement read out to the court by Mr Majzner's brother-in-law Mateusz Kedzierski paid tribute to the father-of-one: "When we heard about what happened myself and my sister were devastated, we all use that crossing, it's hard for the family and hard for their little daughter. Michal loved them and worked extremely hard to provide for them. He was popular and well-liked and will be greatly missed."

Coroner Caroline Beasley-Murray heard how the driver of the 5pm Greater Anglia Liverpool Street to Norwich train saw Michal trying to peddle across the crossing as he sped at over 100mph towards Witham.

The train was not due to stop at the station and was travelling at maximum speed over the crossing with red lights flashing and an audible warning sounding.

Stuart Johnson, inspector at a rail accident investigation bureau for the Department of Transport, told the court: "We believe from our investigations that users of the crossing were often unaware of how close the train was because it is quite difficult to pick out the train's headlights amongst the lights of Witham station, only 700 metres from the crossing."

Investigators also found that pedestrians would cross immediately after a train had passed, even though another one was soon approaching in the opposite direction.

"Mr Majzner was also probably used to seeing a train at the station for long periods of time before getting to the crossing and so as someone who regularly used it he could have thought it was safe to cross," added Mr Johnson.

The red lights at the Motts Lane crossing bridal pathway, that at the time was accessible on foot, would often remain on for as much as four minutes.

Investigations attributed this to an operational failure at the Liverpool Street control centre that meant the crossing was kept closed for "unnecessarily long" periods of time. This was remedied after this accident.

A report into the accident by the Rail Accident Investigation Branch on January 14 made recommendations that Network Rail needed to make in light of "a history of misuse" at the accident hotspot.

These included replacing the crossing with a bridge, which opened last week on March 28.

It also stated that Network Rail should re-examine the way it applies for orders to close bridleways as this delay in closing the crossing meant it was still open 10 years after it was initially recommended for replacement.

The final recommendation was for Network Rail to check if conditions like Motts Lane existed elsewhere and to take action.

Andrew Bottom from Network Rail assured the court that all these recommendations had been acted upon.

A verdict of accidental death was recorded.

[a-driver]

This subject really does annoy me and I realise this probably isn't going to be a popular opinion.

Motorists up and down the country everyday and just about all able to abide by a signal red light displayed in a traffic light. Failure to do so lands them in hot water with the police.  It is the motorist who is at fault if they ignore it.
You wouldn't drive your car upto a red traffic light in the dead of night and just because you've never ever seen any other traffic at this junction previously, chose to ignore the red light would you?
A train driver faces the sack for having a SPAD^▸ (Signal Passed At Danger), yet a pedestrian or cyclist can ignore a red light at a level crossing and written safety instructions and it is someone else's fault.     Would a cyclist ignore a red traffic light at a busy junction and bomb straight across it?

Even when Network Rail look to close a level crossing, as in this case, they face objections from local people.  In this case, people objected to the removal of equestrian rights despite there being no evidence of use by horse riders!
If Network Rail wants to close a level crossing, especially foot crossing, then they should be able to do so without the need to apply for permission and so many orders.

[grahame]

The red lights at the Motts Lane crossing bridal pathway, that at the time was accessible on foot, would often remain on for as much as four minutes.

Investigations attributed this to an operational failure at the Liverpool Street control centre that meant the crossing was kept closed for "unnecessarily long" periods of time. This was remedied after this accident.

The variation in timing was between 40 seconds and 4 minutes, and with no way for the foot (or, in theory horse) passenger  to ask if the crossing lights were correctly at red during an extended closing - no way to contact the signalman.

Has anyone here ever - when driving a car - come to traffic lights (especially at roadworks) that seem to have stuck on red?  And when they don't change, don' change, still don't change and it's very clearly visible that there's no other traffic around at all, what might some people do?  The problem with employing that scenario in a rail situation is that when a car comes around the corner toward roadworks in the "other" direction it can stop even if the light is green, but in the train situation a train cannot stop.  So I can understand why Mr Majzner, like the majority of people not very much trained on rail safety, might have been tempted to cross or rather (alas) to try to cross ...