Key Highlights
- Rajpal Dene’s car was stranded in the outside lane of a smart motorway for six minutes before crashing.
- The smart motorway system failed to display warning signs despite known issues five days prior.
- Barry O’Sullivan, driving at 77mph, collided with the broken-down Nissan, causing Dhillon’s death.
- National Highways was found responsible for not fixing the technology that day.
- The AA criticizes smart motorways as a “failed experiment” and advocates for hard shoulders’ return.
The Tragedy of Technology Failures on Smart Motorways
On March 7, 2022, just before 8:30 AM, the sun was high in a partially-cloudy sky above Reading, Berkshire. Rajpal Dene and her mother Pulvinder Dhillon were on their way home from an errand when Dene’s Nissan Micra broke down on the M4 smart motorway. The car was parked in lane four for six long minutes before disaster struck.
For those six agonizing minutes, Dene turned on hazard lights and prayed for help, but there was none to be found.
Thirty-five cars zipped by within inches of the stranded vehicle, 14 forcing themselves to swerve to avoid a collision. Fourteen warning signs along the road should have alerted drivers about the obstruction, but they did not work due to an unaddressed technology failure.
The Failing Technology and National Highways’ Negligence
Five days prior, on March 2, National Highways had been informed that data was not being received from a section of the M4. Despite this warning, the company failed to fix the issue, leaving drivers like Barry O’Sullivan—who was driving at approximately 77mph without wearing his seatbelt—completely unaware of the danger ahead.
O’Sullivan’s van crashed into Dene’s car, sending it up in flames. Pulvinder Dhillon was killed instantly despite Dene and other drivers’ heroic attempts to rescue her.
The case went to Reading Crown Court where a jury found O’Sullivan guilty of causing death by careless driving. His defense argued that the smart motorway’s faulty technology made the collision inevitable, but this didn’t save him from conviction.
The AA’s Critique and Call for Change
Edmund King, President of the AA, has long been a vocal critic of smart motorways. He described them as “a failed experiment.” He emphasized that the lack of hard shoulders makes drivers dependent on technology that often fails. With no hard shoulder to escape to, drivers are left vulnerable in live lanes.
“All too often,” King stated, “the technology does not work. We’ve had hundreds of cases previously of the technology not working.” He advocates for a return to hard shoulders and more effective use of technology to warn drivers if there is an issue on the road.
The Legal Implications and Future Concerns
This tragic incident highlights the ongoing debate about smart motorways and their safety. While proponents argue that they improve traffic flow, opponents like the AA point out that failures in these systems can have catastrophic consequences. The jury’s decision to hold National Highways responsible for not fixing the technology underscores the need for better maintenance and oversight.
The case serves as a stark reminder of the human cost of technological failures on our roads.
Until smart motorway systems are made truly reliable, drivers will remain at risk. Pulvinder Dhillon’s death is a somber testament to the importance of safety on our highways.
