Over one third of London's basement construction unsafe

More than one in three basement construction sites in London has failed health and safety checks the Health & Safety Executive (HSE), said today.

On 40 sites out of 109 site surveyed recently by HSE inspectors, enforcement action was taken. They issued a total of 76 safety improvement notices and at four of those projects, conditions were so dangerous that the sites were shut down.

More than half of the prohibition notices served dealt with real risks of workers falling from height, either into unfenced excavations or through unprotected floor openings.

Inspectors visited 109 sites in the London boroughs of Hammersmith & Fulham, Kensington & Chelsea andWestminster & Wandsworth, on 15 and 16 November.
As result of the issues uncovered, the HSE is organising a free awareness event to all involved in basement construction at Wandsworth Town Hall on 19 January 2012

Roofer more concerned about beating the rain than safety

A roofer has admitted putting workers and members of the public at risk, after being spotted working on a roof without any fall protection by a passing HSE inspector.

Burnley Magistrates’ Court heard that Ross Singleton, who trades as Ross’s Roofing, and two other workers were carrying out roof repairs at a hairdressers in Colne, Lancashire, on 24 May 2011.

HSE inspector Jacqueline Western was passing the salon and noticed that there were no safety measures in place to prevent the workers from falling. Singleton had also failed to take precautions to stop debris from dropping on to the busy pedestrian footpath below.

Inspector Western took pictures of the men working and then ordered the work to stop immediately. She issued a Prohibition Notice to Singleton, which required the work to stop until edge protection was installed.

When she returned to the site later in the day, she found that Singleton had ignored the enforcement notice by continuing with the repairs without properly addressing the unsafe method of work.

Singleton appeared in court on 12 January and pleaded guilty to breaching reg.6(3) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005, and s33(1)(g) of the HSWA 1974, for ignoring an enforcement notice. He was fined £350 and ordered to pay £300 in costs.

In mitigation Singleton said he hadn’t considered the roof to be high enough to need edge protection. He explained that following the issue of the Prohibition Notice he erected a tower scaffold to finish the work, which he accepts did not have edge protection. He told the court that his priority on the day was to finish the work before heavy rain began.

Speaking after the hearing, inspector Western said: “Ross Singleton and the two other men were working nearly three metres above the ground – a height that could have resulted in a serious injury if any of them had fallen.

“He should have treated the Prohibition Notice as a formal warning and stopped work until safety measures, such as guard rails, were in place. Instead, he ignored the notice and has found himself in court as a result.

“Dozens of people die every year as a result of a fall while at work. Roofers should treat the risks seriously and take action to make sure workers stay safe.”

The Lancashire Telegraph also reported on the case, and its story received a number of comments from readers who criticised the prosecution. Some labelled health and safety as “a joke”, saying it prevents people from making “an honest living”.

Singleton himself posted a comment, which said: “I hired the scaffold straight away but it started to rain as soon as were erecting it, which meant I had to go back on the roof to sheet-up to prevent the roof being rain-damaged.

“If I had got a professional to install the scaffolding it would have cost £400-£500. The owner of the hairdressers would not have been happy to cover this charge as well as the roof repairs.

Echoing the sentiments of other commentators, he concluded: “I’m an honest young man trying to make an honest living, rather than most my age, who clearly get every penny they can from the government in benefits.”

Independent panel to challenge inspectors’ advice now operational

Businesses that believe they have been the recipients of erroneous, or over-the-top advice from HSE or Local Authority (LA) inspectors can now appeal these decisions to an independent panel.

The Government announced its intention to set up such a body as part of its response to the findings of the Löfstedt review in November – which called, more generally, for a process to challenge cases of incorrect and over-application of health and safety legislation.

Now up and running, the new Independent Regulatory Challenge Panel will look into complaints regarding health and safety advice given by HSE or LA inspectors that duty-holders believe is “incorrect, or goes beyond what is required to control the risk adequately”.

The panel will be chaired by Tricia Henton, former director of environment and business at the Environment Agency. She will be joined by Local Government Regulation’s (formerly LACORS) Mark DuVal, and its former executive director Derek Allen, as well as two ex-employees of the HSE. Other panel members may be appointed in due course.

If businesses are unhappy with the advice they have received, they are encouraged in the first instance to seek to resolve the matter with the relevant HSE or LA inspector, and the inspector’s manager. If they are not satisfied, businesses can then raise the issue with the panel by filling out an online form on the HSE website. If they are still not satisfied with the findings of the panel, they can follow the existing complaints procedures, including writing to the chief executive of the HSE, or relevant LA chief executive, as well as contacting local MPs, or local councillors.

The panel will only consider cases from 30 June last year onwards, and a summary of the cases and the panel’s findings will be made available on the HSE website. An HSE spokesperson said that because the process is new, it is difficult to estimate the scale and number of cases that will be referred to the panel. Nevertheless, to give greater clarity, terms of reference for the panel will be published in the next couple of weeks.

The spokesperson, who was keen to emphasise the independent nature of the panel, added that the HSE is expected to abide by the panel’s decisions, which, in most instances, should be made promptly by the panel, although there is no defined timescale.

The panel will also only deal with decisions of regulatory advice to control risks, which stop short of enforcement action. Hence, the appeals mechanism is completely separate from other appeals processes that will cover costs-recovery, and which already cover enforcement notices.

Asked if the HSE is concerned that a further appeals process will undermine the authority of its inspectors, and bring their competence under added scrutiny, the spokesperson replied: “Tackling disproportionate advice is vital in restoring confidence in the core business of health and safety, which is to reduce accidents and ill health. But, when our standards are not matched, it is only right that employers and duty-holders have a means to appeal decisions.”

Paul Verrico, solicitor-advocate at Eversheds law firm, welcomed the panel from the point of view of accessibility, perspective and accountability. He told SHP: “All too often, our clients either receive conflicting advice from inspectors, or opinions that go beyond the HSE’s written and documented protocols, or codes of practice.”

Traditionally, he added, businesses’ only practical course of action in such circumstances has been to dispute the advice with the inspector, or bite the bullet.

However, he cautioned that LA inspectors would need to “ensure they receive the same messages and have the same access to information as HSE inspectors,” as the panel will be judging both HSE and LA inspectors to the same standards.

Construction firm Henry Bros fined £75k over worker's death

One of Northern Ireland's largest construction firms has been fined £75,000 after pleading guilty to breaches which led to the death of a worker.

Desmond Stevenson, 62, died when a temporary building at RAF Aldergrove fell on him in 2006.
Henry Brothers was fined £75,000 plus £15,000 in costs, while architect Anthony Stewart was fined £5,000.

The case was brought by the Health and Safety Executive (HSENI).

Mr Stevenson was a joiner employed by Henry Brothers in Magherafelt.

His family said on Monday that they were glad they now had "closure and as such will be able to grieve".

"This outcome will not bring our husband/father back but may ensure that no-one else will have to go through this scenario," they said in a statement.

Henry Brothers had secured a £7.5m contract, part of which was to move 10 pre-fabricated units from one area to another at RAF Aldergrove.

At Antrim Crown Court last week Henry Brothers and Mr Stewart pleaded guilty to two breaches of health and safety legislation arising out of the incident.

The court heard that the risk of collapse had not been identified at the planning stage due to "inadequate risk assessment, design and supervision".

Clear reminder

A defence lawyer for Henry Brothers said that while the company accepted responsibility as the main contractor, none of the other experts on site appreciated the risk.

In a statement, the company expressed its condolences to Mr Stevenson's family.

It said it had provided "its full cooperation and assistance to the Health and Safety Executive from the outset and throughout its investigation".

A lawyer for Mr Stewart said that although he was project manager, he was a step removed from having direct responsibility for health and safety.

He said his client had not been on site for six weeks before the accident and had been shocked to be caught up in the prosecution.

On Wednesday Denise Donaghy, an inspector with HSENI's investigation team said: "This case sends out a clear reminder to architects and designers that the risks involved in construction activities must be considered and addressed at the design stage.

"Also companies involved in construction must make sure their activities are carried out in a safe and considered manner."

Leicester firm fined after death of worker

A Leicester manufacturer of quarrying plant and equipment has been fined after a worker was crushed between two nine-metre steel structures which were being lifted with an overhead travelling crane.

The structures were part of a 500 tonne concrete batching plant installation which had been manufactured for a project in the Sudan. Michael Tilley, 55, from Barrow-upon-Soar, was killed instantly when one of the 1.5 tonne structures became dislodged and fell on his head during a lifting operation.

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) prosecuted Parker Plant Ltd after carrying out an investigation into the 13 December 2008 incident at the company's Canon Street site in Leicester.

Leicester Crown Court heard Mr Tilley and a colleague had been attempting to load the large parts of structural steelwork into a shipping container using an overhead crane. The parts would not fit into the container so they were being placed on the ground next to it. The pair had been directed to place one steel section on top of the other and were releasing the lifting chains from the load when the top section slid off the bottom one and trapped Mr Tilley between the two, causing fatal head injuries.

HSE told the court that neither Mr Tilley nor his colleague had received the proper training on how to plan and manage such a complex lifting operation, nor had they had any information on the size, weight or centre of gravity of the load which would have enabled them to sling the load correctly.

They had been working with an incorrect diagram that showed the two steelwork structures fitting on top of each other, which in fact was not possible. The structures were not strapped together meaning the load was unstable and liable to fall unexpectedly. The work was not properly planned or supervised and the lifting equipment provided to do the job was defective.

Parker Plant Ltd of Viaduct Works, Canon Street, Leicester, pleaded guilty on 2 September to breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974. They were sentenced today and were fined £180,000 and ordered to pay £47,500 costs.

Sue Thompson, one of the HSE's Principal Inspectors said:

"This fatal incident was utterly preventable and occurred as a direct result of Parker Plant Ltd's approach to the safety of its workers.

"This company failed to provide the proper training for the work they were undertaking, and if that work had been adequately planned and supervised this tragedy would not have happened. Because of this company's failures, one man lost his life and another will have to live with the after effects of witnessing such a horrific incident."

After the hearing, Mr Tilley's mother Doreen Upton said:

"Michael is a greatly-missed only son, father and grandfather. He is in our thoughts every day. The penalty imposed on the firm will never bring him back but we are pleased that the seriousness of what happened that day has been recognised by the court."

 

Illegal gas fitter receives two-year prison sentence

An Accrington man who falsely claimed he was a registered gas engineer has been sent to prison for two years for endangering people's lives at two properties in Lancashire, including a baby boy.

Stephen Jonathan was prosecuted by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) for committing a total of six offences, after his work was classified as being 'immediately dangerous'.^[1]

An unsafe chimney flue on a bolier Stephen Jonathan installed in Accrington

Burnley Crown Court heard the 35-year-old's actions had put residents at risk of being killed or seriously injured in a gas explosion or from carbon monoxide poisoning.

The court was told Mr Jonathan falsely claimed he was a registered gas engineer when he installed a new boiler at a community nurse's home on Willows Lane in Accrington on 22 October 2010. Geoff Street regularly looked after his sister's baby in his house, without knowing the boiler was operating dangerously.

An engineer was sent to repair the boiler after it was reported to the manufacturer as being faulty. He classified the installation as being 'immediately dangerous', and disconnected it from the gas supply straight away.

Mr Jonathan's work was reported to Gas Safe Register, which holds the official list of legal and safe gas engineers, and HSE, which carried out an investigation. It found that he had also installed central heating at a house on Avondale Road in Lancaster during November and December 2010.

He had again claimed to be a registered gas engineer, and the installation of the boiler had again been classified as being 'immediately dangerous'.

Stephen Jonathan, of Collins Drive, Baxenden, admitted putting lives at risk, and of carrying out gas work while falsely claiming to be a registered gas engineer. He was sentenced to 24 months in prison at Burnley Crown Court on 20 October 2011.

Geoff Street, 52, spent £1,700 on making the boiler safe at his house on Willows Lane in Accrington. He said:

"It's shocking that Stephen Jonathan didn't have any consideration for my life or anyone else's. I was looking after my sister's baby in the house without knowing both our lives were being put in danger by the boiler he installed.

"He appeared quite professional when I first met him. But he refused to come back when I told him the boiler kept switching itself off, and I eventually found out it was actually dangerous.

"I'd advise people to check the Gas Safe website or ring the helpline before agreeing to gas work being carried out. There are some people out there just out to make a fast buck, with no regard for health and safety."

Stuart Kitchingman, the investigating inspector at HSE, added:

"Mr Jonathan has displayed an appalling disregard for the lives of other people, and a total contempt for the law.

"He went out of his way to fake qualifications and he continued to carry out gas work illegally. His actions caused a considerable amount of cost and distress to his customers, and it was only luck that no one was seriously harmed.

"It is vital people become members of the Gas Safe Register before carrying out gas work, or they risk putting lives in danger. Members of the public and landlords should also check that gas engineers have a valid Gas Safe Register ID card."

Paul Johnston, Chief Executive of Gas Safe Register, added:

"We work closely with the HSE to investigate unregistered gas fitters and the prosecution of Stephen Jonathan comes as welcome news to us all.

"Gas fitters working unregistered like Stephen Jonathan are far more common than you think - we estimate they're doing 250,000 illegal jobs each year, causing fires, explosions, gas leaks, carbon monoxide poisoning and leaving people out of pocket.

"All gas engineers have to be Gas Safe registered - it's the law. Our message to everyone is clear - check the engineer's Gas Safe Register ID card before letting them work on gas."

Collier Industrial Waste Ltd fined over forklift accident

A Greater Manchester company has been fined £20,000 after a worker suffered life-threatening injuries when he was hit by a 35-tonne forklift truck.

The 60-year-old, from Wirral, suffered organ damage and broken bones in the incident at Collier Industrial Waste Limited in January 2010.

He was in hospital for several months and has permanent injuries.

The firm admitted breaching Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992.

It was also ordered to pay £9,410 in prosecution costs at Trafford Magistrates' Court.

'Entirely preventable'

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) said its investigation found the company did not have sufficient systems in place to protect workers from reversing vehicles on the site.

This could have included having marked walkways, a one-way system or making sure any reversing vehicles were guided by another worker on the ground.

Speaking after the hearing, HSE Inspector Daniel Longdon, said: "This was an entirely preventable incident which could have cost one of Collier's employees his life.

"There were several systems the company could have introduced to make sure workers were not put at risk by moving vehicles. Most of these would have been simple and inexpensive.

"If another worker had stood on the ground to guide the forklift truck as it reserved then this incident could have been avoided."

Company fined after worker's finger amputated

A modular building company has been fined after a worker was left with permanent injuries when a lifting operation went wrong.

Banksman John Hughes, of Newark, was working in an outdoor yard of Caledonian Building Systems Ltd at Carlton-on-Trent, Nottinghamshire, on 20 February 2009.

He was helping a fork lift truck driver to raise an 11-tonne modular building unit off some blocks and a wheeled axle, on to a lorry, but the unstable load started to rock. Mr Hughes put his right hand on to the wooden block, to move it out of the way, but one end of the unit came down on his fingers.

His index finger was crushed and had to be amputated at the knuckle, however eighteen months later after continuing problems it was completely removed. His middle finger was also damaged. Mr Hughes was off work for twelve weeks in total before returning to work.

A Health and Safety Executive (HSE) investigation found the lifting operation was disorganised and the employees involved were not provided with clear information or instructions. It was unclear who was supposed to participate in the operation, what their role was, which equipment would be used and whether the unit would be moved elsewhere or simply vertically lifted.

Caledonian Building Systems Ltd, of Glendale Gryfe Road, Bridge of Weir, Renfrewshire, pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 8(1)(c) of the Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations 1998 and Regulation 3(1)(a) of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999. Today Nottingham Magistrates fined the firm £15,000 and ordered it to pay costs of £7,328.

After the hearing HSE inspector Stuart Parry said:

"This was a routine lifting operation for Caledonian Building Systems Ltd yet it was poorly assessed and planned and was conducted in a disorganised manner. Although Mr Hughes received a life-changing injury, the consequences could have been even worse. The risks associated with routine lifting operations should have been assessed and a simple plan devised and followed to eliminate or adequately control the risks.

"Companies moving large loads with lift trucks should remember these basic legal requirements to ensure they protect their employees and anyone else who may be affected by their work."

Worker’s injuries severe enough to necessitate amputation 

One worker who had his leg run over by a dumper truck was injured severely enough to warrant the crushed limb’s surgical removal, according to the details of his work accident claim.

Bromley native Michael O’Donovan, forty one years of age, had been working as a building work assistant at Arsenal’s Ashburton Grove Emirates stadium, at the time of the accident, his personal injury solicitors recently reported. The worker’s injuries were so serious that doctors performed a surgical amputation of his right leg in the wake of the incident, where he also suffered a fractured pelvis as well.

The Government’s Health and Safety Executive conducted investigative proceedings regarding the incident shortly thereafter, revealing that the three construction firms that had been responsible for the work site had neglected to ensure that there had been safe segregation between vehicles and pedestrians. Hemel Hempstead based Sir Robert McAlpine Limited, was given a fine of £19,000 for its role in Mr O’Donavan’s life-changing injuries, and both Watford based Maylim Limited and Rickmansworth based Skansa Utilities Ltd, McAlpine’s two contractors, were fined £18,000 and £17,000 respectively, after all three admitted to breaching health and safety regulations at a hearing in Magistrates’ Court for the City of London.

The HSE inspector who was involved in the hearing spoke once the fines were handed down, stating that all construction sites must by necessity segregate vehicles and workers whenever it was practical to do so. The inspector also said that the incident could have been averted if there had been an adequate risk assessment of the safety risks.

LFB closes down 'death trap' housing

London Fire Brigade (LFB) has closed down a number of commercial buildings which were being used as residential accommodation as they breached fire safety regulations.

The service has issued prohibition notices on six separate buildings on an industrial estate in Alperton, in the north west of the capital, which housed 150 people.

Inspectors found virtually no means of fire safety measures in the property, with no fire protection situated between different floors and extremely limited means of escape.

Steve Turek, LFB's assistant commissioner for Fire Safety Regulation, said: "The complete contempt some landlords appear to have for the safety of those families they are taking money from is incredible.

"These buildings are potential death traps and it's lucky nobody was killed as a result. Building owners must understand the responsibilities they have under fire safety law."

The brigade was initially alerted to the issue after a fire broke out in an office block on the estate at the end of October and a subsequent inspection found over 50 people living in just 17 rooms.