HSE MYTH BUSTERS

Store fitting rooms can not be opened on first day of sales

Issue

A high street clothing store would not open their fitting rooms on the first day of a sale, when the enquirer asked why they were told it was for health and safety reasons.

Panel decision

This is not a health and safety matter. Any risks associated with busy fitting rooms are minor and can easily be managed if there is a will to do so. Instead of using an excuse that does not fit, the company should be honest and explain that this is a business decision.

Store would not provide plastic knives for customers buying take out food

Issue

Enquirer called into a high street store to purchase some lunch and asked if they had any plastic knives and forks for sale. The assistant said yes they had forks but due to Health & Safety were not allowed to provide plastic knives.

Panel decision

Health and safety at work regulations do not prohibit the provision of plastic knives to customers. Clearly, knives and forks used for eating carry a small risk in the same way that any sharp object does, however it is absurd to suggest that we should not use them. By citing health and safety as the reason for not providing plastic knives, the company trivialises real health and safety risks in the workplace. The real reason for their decision should be explained instead of hiding behind health and safety.

HSE targeted inspection initiative September 2014

‘Health as well as safety’ is the message during this year’s Construction Initiative as poor standards and unsafe practices on Britain’s building sites are targeted during a nationwide drive aimed at reducing ill health, death and injury in the industry.

From 22 September until 17 October, HSE Construction Inspectors will carry out unannounced visits to sites where refurbishment projects or repair works are underway.

This is the ninth annual Initiative and building on previous campaigns, HSE Inspectors will ensure high-risk activities particularly those affecting the health of workers, are being properly managed.

What the initiative does

The main aims of the initiative are:

• to achieve an improvement in industry standards, in particular at small sites
• to increase awareness of HSE’s expectations of the industry
• to demonstrate that HSE will use the enforcement tools at its disposal to prevent immediate risk and bring about sustained improvements

What inspectors look for

During inspections, HSE inspectors will consider whether:

• risks to health from exposure to dust such as silica are being controlled
• workers are aware of where they may find asbestos, and what to do if they find it
• other health risks, such as exposure to noise and vibration, manual handling, hazardous substances are being properly managed
• jobs that involve working at height have been identified and properly planned to ensure that appropriate precautions, such as proper support of structures, are in place
• equipment is correctly installed / assembled, inspected and maintained and used properly
• sites are well organised, to avoid trips and falls, walkways and stairs are free from obstructions and welfare facilities are adequate

HSE uses the inspection initiatives to reinforce its message to the construction industry that poor standards are unacceptable and liable to result in HSE taking enforcement action.

Construction company fined £100,000 after worker run-over by nine tonne truck

 

A major construction company has been fined for safety failings after a worker was critically injured when he was run over by a nine tonne dumper truck. 

David Windsor, 62, of St George, Bristol, suffered life changing injuries, including severe brain injury, in the incident at a building site at Mount Wise, Devonport, on 7 October 2010. 

He also sustained facial fractures, serious injuries to right arm, fractured ribs, a fractured pelvis, leg fractures and foot injuries all on his right side where the dumper ran over him. The injuries were life changing. He spent two weeks in intensive care, a month in a high dependency unit and was finally discharged home from a brain injury rehabilitation unit in April, 2011 – more than six months later. 

Oxfordshire-based JB Leadbitter was sentenced after an investigation by the HSE found the company failed to adequately manage and control workplace transport. 

Plymouth Crown Court heard that Mr Windsor, a delivery driver, was delivering a mortar silo to the Leadbitter site, a former MoD property where 159 new homes were being built. 

He was wearing high-visibility clothing, but was hit by the dumper as he was crossing the site to return to his lorry. 

HSE established that there was no segregated, defined area provided for people on foot like Mr Windsor. JB Leadbitter, as the the principal contractor for the site, had not produced or put in place a suitable traffic management plan to ensure the separation of vehicles and pedestrians using the roadway at the site. 

JB Leadbitter and Co Ltd, of Grange Court, Abingdon Science Park, Abingdon, in Oxfordshire, was found guilty of breaching Section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. The company was fined £100,000 and ordered to pay full costs of around £100,000. 

HSE Inspector Jonathan Harris, speaking after the hearing, said: “This terrible incident has left Mr Windsor with significant and lasting injuries and could easily have led to his death. It is unlikely he will be able to return to work again. 
“Simple forethought and planning could have avoided this happening. JB Leadbitter failed to identify risks to site workers and visitors, such as delivery drivers, in their construction phase plan and made no provision for segregating site vehicles and pedestrians at the top end of the site. Other workers on this large site were frequently exposed to serious risks as a result of this lack of planning. 

“Workplace transport incidents are the second most common cause of serious and fatal incidents in the construction industry, yet they could easily be avoided by having proper plans in place and provision for pedestrians on site.” 
On average, seven workers are killed every year as a result of collisions with vehicles or mobile plant on construction sites. A further 93 are seriously injured. 

Solar panel installer in court after workers’ fall through roof

The owner of a solar panel business has been fined for safety failings after two brothers fell 15ft through a fragile roof that had not been identified as a risk.

Brynley Perrett, 37, suffered a compression fracture of his back and sternum in the incident at at Llan-y-nant Farm, near Trellech, Monmouthshire, in June, 2013. His brother Anthony, was fortunate to escape injury.

They were installing solar panels on a building at the farm on behalf of Andrew Green, trading as Green Park Power. He was prosecuted by the HSE after an investigation found there was no equipment or measures in place, such as nets or scaffold edge protection, to prevent or mitigate a fall.

Cwmbran Magistrates’ Court heard that Mr Green failed to make an adequate assessment of the risks of working on a fragile roof and did not take sufficient action to reduce those risks.

Andrew Green, of Maple Close, Abergavenny, pleaded guilty to a breach of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. He was fined £4,500 and ordered to pay costs of £1,500.

HSE Inspector Steve Richardson, speaking after the hearing, said:

“Both brothers were fortunate not to have suffered far more serious injury in this easily avoidable incident. Had nets or other safety measures been installed then the fall risk would have been significantly minimised and the likelihood of injury reduced.

“Working on a roof can be dangerous, with falls accounting for more deaths in the construction industry than any other type of incident. The risks are well known, and guidance is freely available outlining how to work safely at height.

“The onus was on Mr Green to ensure the safety of those in his employment, but he failed to do so. Those in charge of the work must be properly qualified and competent to ensure that the work is carried out safely.”

Roofers fail the work at height test

West London roofing firm found itself in court after it allowed employees to work on roofs with no safety measures to protect them from potentially fatal falls. 

The HSE prosecuted HR Roofing at Westminster Magistrates’ Court after seeing the dangerous practices in operation at two sites, one in Harrow, the other in Ealing. 

Magistrates were told that an inspector from HSE came across the first instance in March 2013 and identified workers re-roofing a property in Glebe Avenue, Harrow. There was no scaffold or any of the standard safety measures in place to protect the workers. 

HSE took immediate action against HR Roofing by serving a prohibition notice halting the work at height until fall prevention safeguards were installed. 

Just two months later in May, the same dangers were spotted by HSE when the firm was at a property in Bilton Road, Perivale, Ealing. Another prohibition notice was served and an investigation started by HSE. In both cases, HSE considered there was an extreme risk gap with measures taken far below what was required by law. 

HR Roofing Ltd, of Bishops Road, Hayes, Hillingdon, was fined a total of £10,000 and ordered to pay £1,654 in costs after admitting two breaches of the Work at Height Regulations. 

After the case, HSE Inspector Pete Collingwood said: “Working at height carries substantial risk yet no measures had been put in place to try to prevent falls. This example of bad practice was not an isolated event by HR Roofing but was repeated two months after the first incident. 

“The firm exposed workers to unacceptable risks of injury and even death. It then chose to reject any lessons it could have learned from the first case and repeated the offence.” 

Falls from height remain the biggest cause of injury and death within the construction industry and such complete disregard for the workers on site is beyond belief.  This is the third prosecution by HSE in West London in recent months of various roofing contractors and HSE will continue to take enforcement action when such instances of poor business practice are uncovered. 

Employer prosecuted after worker severs thumb

The owner of a Derbyshire firm that specialises in refurbishing precision machining tools, has been fined for safety breaches after a worker severed a thumb while lifting a heavy component.

Mark Evans, from Chesterfield, was rebuilding a rotary table device at CNC Rotary in Staveley when the incident happened on 17 June 2013.

Chesterfield Magistrates’ Court heard that he was under the management of David Helley, 56, of Tuxford, Nottinghamshire.

 

As he worked on the tool, which is used for drilling or cutting work at exact intervals around a fixed axis, and weighs around 30kg, it came loose from a sling attaching it to the prongs of a forklift truck that was being used to lift it.

 

As the sling slipped through the eyebolts in the rotary table, Mr Evans’ right thumb was somehow trapped by the sling and eyebolt, severing it completely and causing further tendon damage to the hand.

 

Mr Evans was given a skin graft to cover the damaged area and a big toe was used to replace the thumb. However, he experienced debilitating complications and was unable to work for a year.

 

An investigation by the HSE found there was no lifting attachment to secure the sling to the forklift truck, and that the sling and eyebolts had not been thoroughly examined.

 

As a result of this incident, HSE inspectors also found a series of other safety breaches that required urgent attention. Prohibition Notices were issued for the use of unsuitable and untested lifting bolts/eyes, the spraying of solvent-based paint in an area where there were unprotected electrics, and one for using lead chromate and isocyanate-containing paints.

 

Improvement Notices were also served for training on lifting and slinging, and for a written scheme of examination for two pressure vessels in the workshop’s compressed air systems.

 

David Helley of Markham Road, Tuxford, was fined £6,000 and ordered to pay costs of £1,514 after pleading guilty to breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974.

 

Speaking after the hearing, HSE inspector Steve Shaw said:

 

“Lifting incidents are often the result of a lack of training, the wrong equipment or the equipment being in a poor state of repair.

“It is important to have the correct equipment in place, which has been thoroughly examined so that safe lifting operations can be carried out by appropriately trained personnel.  

“As a result of not having safe working conditions in place, Mr Evans suffered a painful, life-changing injury that could have been prevented.”

 

 

 

HSE Myth Busters

Donkey rides banned at village fete

Issue

A newspaper reported that council bureaucrats banned donkey rides for children at a village fete because of health and safety concerns.

Panel decision

There is nothing in health and safety law that stops children enjoying a holiday donkey ride, or that requires them to wear helmets to do so.

In this case the organisers cancelled the donkey rides because the operator did not hold the licence required under animal welfare legislation.

This was misrepresented as a health and safety issue in the newspaper report. HSE is keen to set the record straight, and for this and future generations to continue to enjoy the traditions of the summer fete.

Parents were banned from saying goodbye to their children in the playground

Issue

A newspaper reported that during ongoing construction work at a school, parents were banned from saying goodbye to their primary school children in the playground for 'health and safety reasons'.

Panel decision

Ongoing construction work appears to have limited access at the school. In these circumstances the school appears to have acted sensibly and proportionately in making alternative arrangements for older children to be guided to their classes whilst still allowing younger children to be accompanied by their parents/guardians.

Not allowed to return headphones to a shop

Issue

A customer who bought some headphones from a high street store was told that if the packaging was opened the headphones could not be returned for health and safety reasons.

Panel decision

There are no health and safety risks associated with returning headphones to a shop. This may be company policy, but it is not a health and safety matter.
Rather than citing "health and safety" the company should provide a proper explanation to customers on the reasons behind the company policy.

Young family left at risk after faulty gas work

The owner of a building company has been prosecuted for breaching gas safety law after instructing an employee to reposition a gas flue, exposing a young family to serious health risks.

Josephine Zielinski, trading as JBZ Builders, of Leatherhead in Surrey, told the employee – her son – to move a flue serving a gas boiler at a property in Holly Hill, Tunbridge Wells, as part of work on an extension.

Neither the company nor the employee was Gas Safe registered so were not qualified to carry out the work. The employee moved the flue to vent from another external wall in June 2013.

However, when the family called in a plumber to flush the system some time later, he noticed the flue installation was sub-standard and reported the issue to Gas Safe Register. During a visit on 11 November 2013, a registered gas engineer investigated and classed several parts of the installation as either ‘at risk’ or not to current standards.

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) was alerted and charged Ms Zielinski with a breach of gas safety regulations after undertaking its own investigation into the circumstances.

At Sevenoaks Magistrates’ Court,  Josephine Zielinski, of Proctor Gardens, Bookham, Leatherhead, was fined £1,000 and ordered to pay £845 in costs after admitting the breach.

Following the hearing, HSE Inspector Rob Hassell said:

“This incident was entirely preventable and put a young family, including a new-born child, in unnecessary danger from exposure to carbon monoxide and other harmful by-products.

“Usually JBZ Builders use Gas Safe registered engineers for such work but on this occasion, and for the purpose of speed, Mrs Zielinski wrongly used an employee without the recognised competency.

“Work to a gas flue does constitute gas work, a fact that can be misunderstood in the construction industry. Such work should only be carried out by suitably qualified Gas Safe registered engineers.

“Every year people die from carbon monoxide poisoning caused by gas appliances and flues that are not properly installed, maintained or that are poorly ventilated.”

Russell Kramer chief executive of Gas Safe Register, added:   “Every Gas Safe registered engineer carries a Gas Safe ID card, which shows who they are and the type of gas appliances they are qualified to work on.   We always encourage the public to ask for and check the card and if they have any concerns about the safety of work carried out in their home, to speak to us.

Exploding vessel leads to court for carpet company and engineering inspection firm

A Kidderminster carpet company and a Surrey-based firm have been fined after a large pressure vessel, in which carpet fibres are dyed and processed, exploded, propelling the vessel’s quarter-tonne lid six metres into the air.

No-one was injured in the incident at Brinton Carpets Ltd’s site at Halesfield, Telford on 4 June 2013, but the dangerous incident could have been prevented.
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) carried out an investigation and today (10 Sept) prosecuted Brintons Carpets Ltd, the owner and user of the pressure vessels and Allianz Engineering Inspection Services Ltd, who were contracted to carry out periodic thorough examinations of the dye vessels.

Telford Magistrates’ Court heard that each of Brintons Carpets’ four stock dye vessels, each described as industrial pressure cookers, were pressurised while in use.
During a production run, one of the vessels exploded. The lid, which weighed approximately 250kg, was torn off its locking mechanism and hinges and hit the roof of the factory six metres above. Such was the force of the collision that it left a dent in one of the factory roof girders.

One worker was standing just a few feet from the where the lid came to rest.
The explosion was found to have been caused by a failure of the vessel’s regulator and pressure relief valve. HSE found Brintons Carpets Ltd had not ensured that suitable and sufficient maintenance of the vessel’s safety devices was being carried out. In addition to this, the periodic statutory thorough examinations had not been completed for three years.

A Written Scheme of Examination was in place at Brintons Carpets Ltd, which included the stock dye vessels in question. Although Allianz Engineering Services Ltd were carrying out periodic thorough examinations on the other pressure equipment on site, the HSE found that the four stock dye vats had been overlooked for a number of years. Allianz Engineering Services Ltd, therefore, failed to carry out the required examinations on the vats properly.
Brintons Carpets Ltd of Stourport Road, Kidderminster, Worcestershire, pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 12 of The Pressures Systems Safety Regulations 2000 and was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay costs of £1,174.

Allianz Inspection Services Ltd of Ladymead, Guildford, Surrey, pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 9(2) of The Pressures Systems Safety Regulations 2000 and was fined £13,000 and ordered to pay costs of £1,111.

Speaking after the hearing, HSE inspector Lyn Mizen said:

“If a piece of pressure equipment fails and bursts violently apart, the results can be devastating to people in the vicinity. It was a matter of pure luck that no one was seriously injured in this incident.

“There are clear standards set out in the regulations and strict inspection regimes whereby the user has a duty to ensure that equipment, and its safety devices, are properly maintained. This is backed up by the periodic thorough examinations by competent persons to ensure this is happening and is appropriate and suitable.

“Sadly in this case the user of the pressure system and their competent person both failed in their duties.”

Contractors in court after leisure centre roof fall

Two building contractors have been fined after a worker broke his back when he fell four metres from a roof.

The 36-year-old man from Kettlebrook, Tamworth, fractured a vertebra in his lower back after falling from the roof at Southview Leisure Park, Skegness, on 8 March 2013.

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) carried out an investigation and yesterday (8 Sept) prosecuted SJ Roberts Construction Ltd, of Welshpool, and Seaton Heating and Engineering Services Ltd of Tamworth.

Lincoln Magistrates’ Court heard that SJ Roberts Construction Ltd had been appointed principal contractor for the installation of a new flume tower and swimming pool extension at the leisure park. Seaton Heating and Engineering Services Ltd were employed as sub-contractors to install a new air-handling unit and associated pipework for the swimming pool.

The man, an employee of Seaton Heating and Engineering Services Ltd , was working on the roof of the swimming pool extension, which was accessed by internal stairs, connecting the various ducts and pipes with the air-handling unit. Most of the roof was protected but a section was left exposed, presenting a fall risk.

While working, the man was standing on a narrow plywood area around half a metre wide, close to the open edge.

His route to the stairs was blocked when he needed to go and collect some tools. While walking along the plywood next to the open edge, the plywood gave way and he fell four metres. He landed on his feet but then fell backwards, landing on concrete and rubble.

He spent five days in hospital and needed a back brace when discharged. He had to stay at his parents’ house for six weeks and was unable to work for more than three months. He has since recovered and is now back fully working.
SJ Roberts Construction Ltd of Marton, Welshpool, pleaded guilty to breaching two Regulations of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007. The company was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay costs of £645.60.
Seaton Heating and Engineering Services Ltd of Belgrave, Tamworth, Staffordshire, pleaded guilty to breaching the Work at Height Regulations 2005 and was fined £7,000 and ordered to pay costs of £519.60
Speaking after the hearing, HSE inspector Chris Copeman said:

“This worker is very fortunate not to have suffered far more serious injuries.

“Throughout the whole process of roof work, there was no adequate protection against falls, such as barriers on the open edge.

“Had he tripped and fallen from the edge of the roof, we could have been dealing with a fatal incident.

“SJ Roberts Construction Ltd and Seaton Heating and Engineering Services Ltd put workers’ lives in danger by allowing them to work on a roof without suitable safety measures being in place. They failed to recognise their responsibility to ensure that work at height carried out under their control was done safely.”

Timber firm in court after worker’s finger amputated

A Lincolnshire timber company has been fined after an agency worker lost the top of his finger in an unguarded machine.

Grantham Magistrates’ Court heard that the 23-year-old, from Holbeach, was helping to clear a blockage on a woodworking machine at Select Timber Products Ltd’s premises in Mill Lane, Donington, when the incident happened on 15 July 2013.

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found two of the machine’s guards had been removed. The machine operator had lifted the main guard to clear the blockage, while a fixed guard on one of the machine’s six cutting head had also been taken off to make cleaning easier.

However, the machine was still under power, so when the agency worker reached in his left hand came into contact with one of the moving cutting heads. Surgeons had to amputate the top of his middle finger on his left hand. He also suffered severe lacerations to two other fingers and only has partial movement in these and his middle finger.

Select Timber Products Ltd was fined a total of £9,900 and ordered to pay a further £1,193 in costs after pleading guilty to three separate breaches of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998.

After the hearing HSE inspector Neil Ward said:

“About 30 to 40 similar incidents are reported to HSE every year. Nearly all result in amputation injuries and most, including this one, could have been prevented if the cutters had come to rest before operators approached them.

“Neither the machine operator nor the injured man had been trained to a suitable standard by Select Timber Products. HSE publishes free guidance for this type of machine but that guidance was not followed.

“Workers should not have been clearing blockages with any of the cutters turning and the fixed guard should never have been removed from one of the heads.”

HSE urges school leaders not to wrap kids in cotton wool

As the new school year begins, HSE is reminding school leaders to strike the right balance in their approach to health and safety risks.

Bans on children wearing frilly socks, hot drinks on school trips and supposed “dangerous footballs” from the playground, are just some of the cases HSE’s Mythbusters Challenge panel has ruled on, where schools have made over zealous and disproportionate decisions in the name of ‘health and safety’ when it comes to dealing with risks to children.

HSE has published new web-based guidance designed to support school leaders to strike the right balance and encourage them to avoid being risk averse. Whilst children need to be kept safe, they also should be able to learn through experience and play conkers without wearing goggles!

Geoff Cox, Head of HSE’s Public Services Sector said:

“Our myth busting shows that schools sometimes go over the top in their efforts to get health and safety right – but in some cases they don’t go far enough.

“We want to encourage school managers to use this guidance to find their own Goldilocks approach – not too much, not too little, but just the right balance. Real risks need to be managed, but that doesn’t mean wrapping children in cotton wool.”

HSE’s Public Services Sector consulted with local government and education stakeholders, the teaching unions and schools health and safety managers to develop the guidance

Fee for Intervention is effective and should stay, says report

A scheme designed to shift the cost of regulating workplace health and safety from the public purse to businesses who break the law has proven effective and should stay, an independent report has concluded.

The report recognised that inspectors at the Health and Safety Executive have implemented ‘Fee for Intervention’ consistently and fairly since it started in October 2012, and found no evidence to suggest that enforcement policy decisions had been influenced in any way by its introduction.

 

The independent panel which conducted the review was chaired by Alan Harding, professor of public policy at Liverpool University. Other participants were representatives of the GMB trade union, the Federation of Small Businesses and the Department for Work and Pensions.

 

According to the report’s authors, the professional approach adopted by HSE’s inspectors has ensured any challenges raised by the scheme during its first 18 months were minimised. The evidence suggests the concerns voiced about FFI have not manifested themselves to any significant or serious extent and that ‘generally inspectors and duty holders continue to work together in improving health and safety management’.

 

Judith Hackitt, Chair of HSE, said:

 

“Both HSE and the Government believe it is right that those who fail to meet their legal health and safety obligations should pay our costs, and acceptance of this principle is growing. This review gives us confidence that FFI is working effectively and should be retained. We will continue to monitor the performance of Fee for Intervention to ensure it remains consistent and fair.”

 

The report, published by HSE today, along with associated research papers, concludes that “it [FFI] has proven effective in achieving the overarching policy aim of shifting the cost of health and safety regulation from the public purse to those businesses who break health and safety laws.”

It also concludes that:

•  Fears that FFI would be used to generate revenue have proven to be unfounded.
• While not popular with some inspectors and duty holders, it has been embedded effectively and applied consistently.
• There is no viable alternative that can achieve the same aims.

HSE Myth Busters

Free weights not allowed in gyms

Issue

Many gyms, especially commercial, only have resistance machines instead of free weights. Health and safety is always the explanation for this as it is said that free weights are unsafe.

Panel decision

There are no Health and safety regulations which would prevent someone lifting free weights in a gym. The gym has a right to set its own policy on the provision and use of fixed weights, which may be linked to levels of supervision and the need to ensure people know how to use the equipment properly. However, it should state its reasons clearly.

 This is a clear case of "health and safety" being used as an easy catch all excuse rather than explaining the reasons for their policy.

Chips can not be served in a paper cone

Issue

When ordering chips from a chip shop to take away, enquirer's wife asked for her chips to be just put in paper and wrapped in a cone rather than have them served in the normal plastic type tray so they would be easier to eat and carry as they walked round the shops. However, she was told by the lady serving behind the counter... "We can't do that, it's against health and safety, in case you burn yourself on the chips". She was then advised that once they served them to her, she is more than welcome to remove the tray and wrap them up herself.

Panel decision

The customer made a perfectly sensible request and there is no health and safety reason which would prevent the shop proprietor doing as requested. Cases of poor customer service like this need to be wrapped up and thrown in the bin.

Landlord fined for endangering tenants

The landlord of a property in Plymouth risked the lives of a young mother and her child, by providing a dangerous gas oven installed in the house a court has heard.

Giles Boardman was prosecuted by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) at Plymouth Magistrates on 29 August following an investigation.

HSE began inquiries when Plymouth City Council alerted them to the lack of a gas safety certificate for the property in Dickiemoor Lane. The council had asked him to provide a certificate on several occasions.

HSE served an Improvement Notice on Mr Boardman, requiring him to provide a landlords’ gas safety check but this had not been done by the notice expiry date.

In April, 2014, an engineer called in by Mr Boardman, found problems with the gas controls that controlled the gas flow for oven and notified HSE. The oven was classified by the Gas Safe registered engineer as Immediately Dangerous, meaning if operated or left connected to the gas supply it could cause an immediate danger to life or property. The oven has now been replaced.

Giles Boardman of Wheatridge, Plympton, Plymouth pleaded guilty to two breaches of gas safety regulations and a breach of the Health and Safety at Work Act. He was fined a total of £4,050 and ordered to pay costs of £513.

HSE Inspector, Simon Jones, speaking after the hearing, said:

“Landlords have a legal duty to carry out gas safety checks which are there to protect their tenants from death or injury.

“In this case, Mr Boardman ignored repeated requests to carry out the checks and as a result, a serious fault with the oven went undetected until discovered by an engineer.”

Gas engineer left boiler in dangerous state

A Somerset gas engineer has been fined for unsafe gas work after leaving a boiler in an “immediately dangerous” condition when he carried out a service.

Mark Sampson, 42, from Bridgwater, was prosecuted by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) at Exeter Magistrates’ Court for a safety breach following an investigation into his actions.

Magistrates were told that Mr Sampson is a registered gas engineer with the Gas Safe Register, and that as well as undertaking work independently he also carried out work as an employee of a local company.

The court heard how the company, also on the Gas Safe Register, had instructed Mr Sampson to service the boiler at a property in Brackendown, West Hill, on 19 March 2014 as part of a contract the homeowners had with their energy supplier.

He carried out the service but said he needed to order some parts and left the property, leaving the boiler working. He then contacted his boss to seek approval from the energy supplier to obtain the parts.

The energy supplier was suspicious and instructed another gas engineer from a separate company to visit the home the same day to check if the parts were really needed. The second engineer found some of the parts were not needed and that Mr Sampson had used a 20p piece to “repair” a viewing glass in the boiler which mean it had to be classed as “immediately dangerous”.

Mark Sampson, 42, of Watermans Meadow, Bridgwater, was fined £1,000 ordered to pay £353 costs after pleading guilty to breaching Section 7(a) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974.
After the hearing, HSE Inspector Simon Jones said:

“Mark Sampson was Gas Safe registered, which makes it even more shocking that he failed to carry out this work to the correct standard thereby putting the homeowners and any visitors to the property at risk.

“Using a 20p piece in this way is totally unacceptable and meant the boiler was classed as ‘immediately dangerous’ posing a risk of fire and carbon monoxide gas leaking from the boiler.

“There were signs of heat damage inside and outside the boiler before Mark Sampson carried out this ‘repair”, so he should have been alerted to the risk of fire.”

Landlord in court for gas safety failing

An Accrington landlord has been ordered to pay nearly £60,000 in fines and costs after he ignored repeated warnings about arranging an annual gas safety check at a house in the town. 

Tariq Ali was given numerous opportunities by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) to arrange an inspection for a property on Persia Street after the previous gas safety record expired in October 2012. 

Landlords are required by law to have gas appliances checked by a Gas Safe registered engineer at least once a year, but Mr Ali failed to do this. 

Trafford Magistrates’ Court heard that he first came to the attention of the Gas Safe Register – the official body for gas engineers – in 2011 after gas appliances at several of his properties were classified as being ‘at risk’ or ‘immediately’ dangerous’. 

Mr Ali was served with an improvement notice relating to the property on Persia Street on 12 September 2013, giving him one month to arrange an annual gas safety check. However, he failed to meet the deadline. 

Tariq Ali, of Knotwood Court, Accrington, was fined £40,000 and ordered to pay £18,054 in prosecution costs after pleading guilty to single breaches of the Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998 and the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 on 4 September 2014. The charges relate to failing to have the gas appliances checked annually, and failing to comply with an improvement notice. 

Speaking after the hearing, HSE Inspector Stuart Kitchingman said: “Mr Ali put his tenants’ lives at risk for financial gain by failing to arrange a gas safety check for nearly two years. We gave him several chances to organise an inspection, but he ignored all of these – including a formal improvement notice. We therefore had no choice but to take legal action. 

“Dozens of people are killed or badly harmed every year from carbon monoxide poisoning so it is vital that landlords take the risks seriously. We will continue to prosecute landlords who think the law doesn’t apply to them.”

 Russell Kramer, Chief Executive of Gas Safe Register, commented: “When it comes to rented property, it is important that landlords know their duties and tenants know their rights. A landlord must be able to provide a gas safety record for the property, showing that the gas appliances have been safety checked by a Gas Safe registered engineer in the last 12 months. 

“Tenants can also sign up to a free reminder service at staygassafe.co.uk to make sure their landlord or managing agent is carrying out their duties of getting an annual gas safety check.”

Scaffolding boss jailed for worker death failings

The Eltham-based owner of a Kent scaffolding business has been jailed for 15 months for safety failings after a worker plunged 14 metres to his death at a site in North West London.

The sentence, at Southwark Crown Court, will run concurrently with the unrelated life imprisonment imposed on Mark Anthony Hayes at the Old Bailey in July this year for the murder of his brother in a family feud.

The latest conviction is the third that Mark Hayes, 53, trading as WSS Scaffolding, has received for offences arising from the fatality of scaffolder Grant Dunmall at Linden Gardens in Notting Hill on 2 July 2012.

He was fined at two separate appearances at Westminster Magistrates’ Court in January and March last year for offences relating to the non-disclosure of essential documents to support a Health and Safety Executive (HSE) investigation.

When it was eventually supplied, the missing paperwork enabled HSE to conclude its enquiries, and highlighted that Mr Hayes could and should have done more to prevent the fall.

Southwark Crown Court was told that  Mr Hayes from Eltham, south east London, was responsible for a tower scaffold outside a domestic property. His employee, scaffolder Grant Dunmall, 25, from Hither Green, was working on the structure when he fell, sustaining fatal injuries.

After a three-day trial at Southwark Crown Court, which concluded yesterday (3 Sept), Mr Hayes was found guilty of a breach of the Work at Height Regulations 2005 for failing to properly plan, supervise and carry out the work at height in a safe manner at the Notting Hill site.

HSE established that edge protection was missing from the scaffold, and that Mr Dunmall wasn’t provided with any other means such as a fall arrest harness, to prevent or mitigate a fall.

Mr Hayes, of Eltham Green Road, Greenwich, south east London was found guilty after defending the case and sent to prison for 15 months for breaching the Work at Height Regulations 2005.

Last year, combined fines of £12,000 and costs of £5,601 were imposed on Mr Hayes after he admitted breaches of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 and the Employers’ Liability (Compulsory Insurance) Act 1969.

The breaches addressed Mr Hayes’ failure to provide legally-required documents relating to his management of work at height after he had earlier ignored a ‘Notice to produce’ served by HSE.

Speaking after the sentencing, HSE Inspector Jack Wilby commented:

“The family and friends of Grant Dunmall have suffered enough heartache through the loss of their loved one without the additional stress of the convoluted legal process we have had to go through to secure justice.

“Our investigation into his tragic death was delayed for several months because of Mark Hayes’ total lack of co-operation in supporting our work. That had a knock-on impact in delaying the Coroner’s inquest, and we had no option but to prosecute before he eventually provided the documentation we needed.

“His wilful obstruction only served to accentuate the fact that his systems and procedures for safely managing work at height were sorely lacking, and fell short of the standards expected from a competent scaffolder.

“The bottom line here is that Mr Dunmall was killed in a preventable fall that could have been avoided.”

Grant’s family added:

“The loss of Grant was a devastating shock to us and also his friends.

“There are rules and regulations in place for very good reasons and the most important of those is to save unnecessary loss of life.  If all employers and companies abide by these rules then more families could be spared the pain and heartache that we have had to experience.

“HSE pursued this investigation despite the lack of co-operation by Mark Hayes and we are pleased justice has been done.”

Building firm pays price for teenager’s loft fall

A 17-year-old labourer from south-west London had a narrow escape after surviving a four-metre fall through a hole in a loft with only cuts and bruises.

However, his employer, More Than Lofts Ltd of Worcester Park, Sutton, suffered a financial penalty when it was prosecuted by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) for safety failings that led to the incident.

Westminster magistrates were told the young worker was part of a team converting the loft at a property in Hammersmith when the incident happened on 6 June 2013.

He stepped on some fragile material that covered a void in the floor and fell four metres, landing on a staircase. The worker, from Morden, who does not wish to be named, suffered no significant injuries.

HSE’s investigation found there were several uncovered or poorly-covered fragile surfaces in the loft space on site. It said More Than Lofts Ltd had failed to take suitable action to prevent falls, such as using platforms or robust covers for the holes in the loft floor.

The court also heard that the company had been served with a Prohibition Notice by HSE in June 2010 halting all work underway on a loft conversion because of the immediate dangers to workers from the lack of safety measures.

More Than Lofts Ltd, of Central Road, Worcester Park, was fined £6,000 and ordered to pay £729 in full costs after admitting a breach of the Work at Height Regulations.

After the hearing, HSE Inspector Gavin Pugh said:

“This young man had an extremely lucky escape from what could have been a fatal or severe injury in a fall of that distance. He and his co-workers were put in unnecessary danger by the careless approach to safety demonstrated by More Than Lofts Ltd.

“The company had ample materials on site to cover over fragile surfaces during work on this loft conversion but failed to do so.  It also clearly disregarded the lessons that should have been learned from the previous enforcement notice about working at height.

“Companies that skirt around safety put lives at risk. The hazards presented by working on or close to fragile surfaces are widely known in the industry and there are numerous deaths and injuries to workers as a result of safety failures every year.”

HSE’s Construction Division is carrying out a nationwide safety initiative on loft conversions during this year, focusing on falls from height and asbestos. Inspectors are making site visits and giving briefings to contractors with the aim of tackling poor standards in loft conversion work and also to raise awareness of the risks that this work involves.

Roofing firm fined for worker’s life threatening injuries

A roofer nearly died after falling whilst working on the ridge of part of a roof where there was no protection to prevent a fall.

James Hopkin (29) from Plymouth, was working on the pitched roof of a mid-terraced house in Torpoint on 18 April 2013 when he fell down onto the rear tenement roof and landed in a neighbouring courtyard suffering severe head injuries.

The incident was investigated by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) which prosecuted Mr Hopkin’s employer, B&C Roofing, at Truro Magistrates Court today (2 September).

The court heard that Mr Hopkin was the supervisor for the work on the house in Marine Drive and was working on the ridge of the main roof when he fell, sustaining life threatening and life changing injuries and leaving him bed bound for more than six months.

No edge protection, which could have prevented the fall to the ground, had been installed to protect the area where he was working and ultimately fell.

B&C Roofing, of Forresters Business Park, Estover Close, Plymouth, pleaded guilty to a breach of the Work at Height Regulations 2005 and was fined £16,000 and ordered to pay £9,627 in costs.

Following the hearing, HSE Inspector Jonathan Harris said:

“Mr Hopkin suffered major, life-changing injuries and there was a real possibility that the fall could have proved fatal.

“Falls from height are the biggest cause of workplace deaths and it’s crucial that employers make sure work is properly planned, appropriately supervised and that sufficient measures such as edge protection are put in place to control the risks of harm from falls.

“There is no excuse for employers failing to safeguard workers who have to work at height.”

Enfield firm in court after faking safety record

A North London meat wholesalers has been sentenced for operating a fault-ridden forklift truck and trying to deceive safety inspectors by forging a positive examination report on the vehicle.

MIB United Meat Ltd, of Enfield, Middlesex, was prosecuted by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) at Westminster Magistrates’ Court after admitting three breaches of safety legislation.

The court heard that the offences resulted from a routine health and safety inspection at their premises in Stockingswater Lane, Enfield, on 8 March 2013.

During the visit, an HSE inspector asked to see the vehicle examination records for the company’s 2.5-tonne counterbalance forklift truck. A document was later emailed to the inspector but appeared to be – and was later proven to be – a fraud.

HSE found the forklift truck had never been examined, as required by safety rules for lifting equipment, since being purchased in August 2011. A specialist mechanical inspector from HSE, who examined the forklift in April 2013, found more than 40 faults, including some that could have endangered its operator.

HSE served a prohibition notice on MIB United Meat Ltd to stop any use of the vehicle until it was safe to use.

MIB was fined a total of £18,000 and ordered to pay £2314 in full costs for single breaches of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974; the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations and the Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations.

After the hearing, HSE Inspector Tahir Mortuza said:

“MIB United Meat Ltd was required by law to make sure its forklift truck was maintained regularly and properly examined to allow the identification of safety-critical defects. It failed to do this and the vehicle was allowed to deteriorate to the point of being riddled with faults.

“It compounded this failure with a blatant attempt to deceive HSE by forging documentation purporting to be an examination record. This is a serious offence and demonstrates that the company was willing to expose its employees to the risk of serious injury or even death.”

 

 

Cannock scaffolder in court over worker’s fractured skull

A West Midlands scaffolder has received a four month prison sentence suspended for 12 months and ordered to pay compensation of £2,500, after a construction worker suffered a fractured skull when a pulley wheel fell seven metres and struck his head. 

Birmingham Magistrates’ Court heard 27-year-old Mark Jones, from Darlaston, was installing lead flashing on a school roof  using lifting equipment installed by Christopher Alan Harvey, trading as Cannock Wood Scaffolding , when the incident happened on 8 August 2013.
 
Mr Jones, who was working for a sub-contractor on the site, was operating a ‘gin wheel’, or metal pulley wheel, which is used to hoist and lower materials with ropes. The wheel had been attached to the scaffold by Christopher Harvey.
As Mr Jones was loading materials from the ground ready for lifting to the roof, the wheel, weighing four kg, fell seven meters from the scaffold and struck him on the head fracturing his skull. He has since made a full recovery.

A Health and Safety Executive (HSE) investigation found that Mr Harvey had failed to properly secure the gin wheel to the scaffold – no scaffold fittings were used to prevent the gin wheel from falling off the end of the scaffold tube, and the supporting structure was inadequately braced. 

Christopher Alan Harvey, 40, of Wolverhampton Road, Cannock, West Midlands, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 10(1) of The Work at Height Regulations 2005 and received a four month prison sentence suspended for 12 months and ordered to pay Mark Jones compensation of £2,500, plus £527.56 in costs.

Speaking after the hearing, HSE Inspector Edward Fryer said: “This incident was entirely preventable and could easily have been avoided had Mr Harvey followed the published guidance to attach the wheel securely. Gin wheels are a common accessory for scaffolders and must be attached correctly. The installation of this gin wheel fell far short of the expected standard and made it almost inevitable that it would fall from the scaffold endangering anyone walking beneath. 

“Mr Jones suffered a fracture to his skull, but it is nothing more than luck that he was not more seriously injured, or even killed.

“If you are installing scaffolding or associated lifting equipment, it must be left in a safe condition. The quality of work could make the difference between life or death.”

Building firm prosecuted after joiner falls through ceiling

A Manchester construction firm has appeared in court over safety failings after a joiner was badly injured when he fell through a ceiling.

Patrick Moran, 48 from Stretford, had been working on a loft conversion in Chorlton when the incident happened on 21 May 2013.

Quaintbrook Properties Ltd was prosecuted by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) after an investigation found he had been asked to help install partition walls without any floorboards in place.

Trafford Magistrates’ Court heard that the company had been hired to carry out loft conversions at two neighbouring properties on York Road. The firm had installed new floor joists but wanted the partition walls to be fitted before the floorboards, so they could be easily lifted up in the future.

The job sheet instructed the two joiners to use boards on the site as temporary flooring but when they arrived they could only find three pieces of wet plywood outside, which were unusable. They therefore had to use some old loft boards to create temporary walkways and kept moving them to reach different areas of the loft.

As the joiners were installing the wooden frame for a partition wall, one of them slipped and his leg went between the floor joists and through the plasterboard ceiling up to his hip.

He managed to pull himself up onto the joints but suffered severe internal bruising and continues to suffer from pins and needles to his left hand, caused by possible nerve damage.

Quaintbrook Properties Ltd, of Oswald Road in Chorlton, was fined £5,000 and ordered to pay £5,518 in prosecution costs after pleading guilty to a breach of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974.

Speaking after the hearing, HSE Inspector Laura Moran said:

“The joiner was badly injured in the incident but it could easily have been much worse if he had fallen all the way into the room below. Quaintbrook Properties was responsible for his safety but it failed to take this responsibility seriously.

“The company did not give its employees any information about health and safety, or carry out a proper assessment of the risks ahead of the work starting. As well as the missing floorboards, there was also a large opening for the new staircase without any markings or protective measures around it.

“Following the incident, the company arranged for temporary flooring to be installed across the whole area. If this had been in place at the time of the incident then the joiner’s injuries could have been avoided.”

Safety failures land two Kent companies in court

Two construction companies have been sentenced for safety failings after a worker was injured in a fall at a site near Canterbury in Kent.

The 46-year-old worker, from Tunbridge Wells, who does not wish to be named, fell through the fragile roof of a food packaging firm’s premises in Bridge after losing his balance on the working platform he was using.

He landed on the cold store roof nearly two metres below and suffered a broken rib and fractured left wrist, but has since recovered and returned to work.
The incident, on 4 October 2012, was investigated by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) which prosecuted Ramsgate-based firms WW Martin Ltd and Brandclad Ltd.

Canterbury Magistrates were told the food firm had used WW Martin for several years to undertake building work at their site so had contracted them to remedy leaks in the premises. WW Martin in turn hired specialist roofing firm Brandclad to carry out the work.

Before the repairs started, WW Martin were sent a risk assessment and a planned method of work  by Brandclad highlighting the danger of the fragile roof and stating that platforms with handrails would be used, along with harnesses for workers.

However, HSE found that from the start of work on 22 September until a month later when the work finished, the platforms for the roofers were left open and unprotected.

Even when the Brandclad employee fell and work was suspended for ten days to review what had happened, the only change made was to provide platforms that sat flatter and more evenly in the troughs of roof sheets.   The safety measures that had been promised – handrails and harnesses – were never used by Brandclad.  WW Martin, which was responsible for monitoring the work, failed to take any action.

Magistrates heard HSE found both WW Martin and Brandclad had considered putting fall prevention measures inside the roof void but had decided against it because of doubts about the structural strength of the cold store roof.

WW Martin Ltd, Dane Park Road, Ramsgate, and Brandclad Ltd, Orchard Business Centre, North Farm Road, Tunbridge Wells, each admitted one breach of the Work at Height Regulations 2005.

Brandclad, stated by the court to be 60 per cent culpable, was fined £7,000 with £3,588 in costs. WW Martin was fined a higher amount of £10,000 owing to its stronger financial position despite being 40 per cent culpable, also with £3,588 in costs.

Speaking after the hearing, HSE Inspector Melvyn Stancliffe said:
“This was a completely avoidable incident. The dangers of working on fragile roofs are very well- known in the industry. Such work should never be undertaken without careful planning and making sure the right type of fall prevention and mitigation measures are in place.

“It is incredible the work was carried out despite the companies’ misgivings about the strength of the internal cold store roof. Had that given way when the worker fell on to it then HSE would likely have been investigating a death.

“Even after the incident, the job was resumed without any proper improvements made to the working methods. There should be no shortcuts when working on fragile surfaces – no matter how short the duration of a job is.”

Workers’ health put at risk by Hampshire firm

A Hampshire manufacturer has appeared in court after allowing the health of employees to be put at risk.

Brooks Crownhill Patternmakers Ltd, a precision engineering company based in Andover, was prosecuted by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) at Basingstoke Magistrates’ Court for five health and safety breaches.
The offences came to light after an inspection by HSE revealed that risks to health from exposure to vibration, noise and dust had not been adequately managed or controlled.

HSE found that Brooks Crownhill Patternmakers, which produces metal castings for a range of industries, had no effective management systems to control exposure to the health risks to their employees. As a result, workers experienced a range of symptoms which required further investigation and monitoring.

Brooks Crownhill Patternmakers Ltd of North Way, Walworth Industrial Estate, Andover, was fined a total of £7,000 and ordered to pay £1,379 in costs after admitting single breaches of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974; the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999; the Control of Vibration at Work Regulations 2005; and two breaches of the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations.

After the hearing, HSE Inspector Michael Baxter said:

“The company failed to fully control the numerous risks arising from its business activities. This has meant several employees developing symptoms relating to exposure to vibration, noise and dust, which could have been picked up sooner as part of a health surveillance programme. “Brooks Crownhill Patternmakers did not respond to changing workloads and processes, and failed to act on advice provided by its occupational health provider or by contractors servicing equipment.

“The company has since reviewed and made significant changes to its risk management and occupational health monitoring.”

Disqualified director jailed over worker death and company deception

A Hampshire businessman, who was disqualified from being a company director, was today jailed for serious fraud and safety offences. A second businessman was given a suspended prison sentence for similar offences.

The two were sentenced at Winchester Crown Court today (29 Aug) following joint proceedings brought by BIS (the Department for Business Innovation and Skills) and the Health and Safety Executive (HSE). The safety offence related to the tragic death of a 40 year-old Southampton worker in September 2010.
Paul O’Boyle, 56, of Cholderton Road, Andover, was jailed for a total of 26 months; 16 months for a breach of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974;  ten months for a breach of the Fraud Act 2006; and a total of eight months concurrent for four  breaches of Section 13 of the Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986. He was also disqualified from being a company director for the maximum of 15 years.

Russell Lee, 67, of Quay 2000, Horseshoe Bridge, Southampton, was given a 12-month prison sentence suspended for two years after admitting the same breach of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act and a concurrent six months, also suspended, after pleading guilty to aiding and abetting O’Boyle in his disqualification.

Lee was also disqualified as a director, for seven years, ordered to pay £8,000 toward prosecution costs and given 150 hours’ community service.

The safety offences related to their running of Alton-based Aztech BA Ltd and the death of a worker who was crushed and killed by a two-tonne metal sand-moulding box that fell from the lifting chains of a crane he was using to manoeuvre it.

The court was told Paul O’Boyle had been disqualified from acting as a company director for 12 years in 2006 but continued to act in that capacity at a number of foundry companies, including Aztech(BA) Ltd, which operated from premises at Lasham, Hampshire. In running Aztech, Mr O’Boyle was aided by Russell Lee, who agreed to be the registered director of the company.

The offences came to light following the fatal incident at the now-insolvent company, Aztech, when Ian Middlemiss, 40, who lived in Thornhill, Southampton, was crushed beneath a heavy sandbox on 30 September 2010. Colleagues scrambled to free him, but he was pronounced dead at the scene by paramedics.

HSE investigated the death and identified serious concerns with the systems of work in place at the time, and with the lifting equipment. HSE became aware of the Companies Act offences and a joint investigation with BIS was undertaken.
HSE found that the crane at the centre of the incident had not been checked and tested as the law requires, and there were inadequate provisions in place covering competency, supervision or training. The court heard the incident could have been prevented had the system of work been reviewed and properly assessed.

HSE inspectors also identified problems with lead exposure at the company. Substances containing lead were used elsewhere at the site as part of a separate bronze moulding process, but the control and health surveillance measures were insufficient – meaning workers were being exposed to potentially harmful levels of lead without realising it.

The court was told that at the time of Mr Middlemiss’ death the foundry was the subject of three Improvement Notices served by HSE following earlier visits in September 2009 and June 2010. A number of important safety improvements were required, but few had been satisfactorily implemented, largely, claimed the management team, because of financial constraints.

HSE argued the fatality incident could have been avoided had the necessary changes in the relevant enforcement notices taken place.

Aztech BA Ltd was also sentenced for a breach of Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act, after a guilty plea was submitted on behalf of the insolvent firm by its administrators. The court imposed a fine of £100,000.
In terms of the other offences, the judge heard that between 2006 and 2011 Paul O’Boyle contravened two orders disqualifying him as a director by acting in that capacity in no fewer than four separate companies, including Aztech.
He was also responsible for the cross-firing of cheques, which were written from the bank account of one of the companies, which was no longer trading, to provide funds for Aztech.

BIS investigators established that Aztech drew almost £92,500 in this way, taking advantage of a short window after the cheques were presented but before they bounced.

The investigators also established that Russell Lee aided and abetted Paul O’Boyle as the registered director of Aztech, performing tasks such as writing blank cheques for Mr O’Boyle to use, but not fulfilling the responsibilities of being the director of the company, allowing O’Boyle to run the business.
In his sentencing comments, the Recorder of Salisbury, His Honour Judge A H Barnett, said Paul O’Boyle had behaved in a ‘disgraceful’ way and had been culpable of ‘extremely shoddy business practice’.

After reading a statement from Mr Middlemiss’ father, the judge said the impact of the incident had been devastating: “It was harrowing, and underlines the personal tragedy that could have been avoided.”

After sentencing, Tim Galloway, HSE Director of Operations, Southern Division, said:

“The safety standards at Aztech BA Ltd fell well short of those required, as Paul O’Boyle and Russell Lee were only too aware. They knew improvements were needed to protect workers like Ian Middlemiss and they had clear responsibilities as senior management to ensure the necessary changes were implemented.

“Sadly one of the many areas that was seemingly overlooked was the system of work surrounding the overhead crane. Had this been properly assessed then Ian’s tragic death could have been prevented.”

David Middlemiss, Ian’s father, commented:

“I brought my son up since he was an infant and cared for him all his life until his death.  His passing has left a huge empty void in my life, a devastating loss that I will never recover from.”

Deputy Chief Investigation Officer Liam Mannall, from BIS, said:

“Individuals are disqualified from being company directors for good reason, usually because of conduct which shows them to be unfit to operate a business. This case shows the tragic consequences of Mr O’Boyle ignoring his disqualification.”

Hove firm prosecuted after flouting asbestos laws

A Hove-based firm has been fined after it flouted asbestos regulations and removed some of the dangerous material just three weeks after being refused a licence to carry out such work.

Asbestos Damage Limitations Ltd, trading as ADL, was prosecuted at Brighton Magistrates’ Court for safety breaches following the work undertaken at premises in Dyke Road, Hove, between 22 and 25 October 2013.

The case was brought by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) after investigating a complaint that an unlicensed contractor was carrying out asbestos removal work.

The court was told that ADL had possessed a licence to remove asbestos – a known carcinogen – but that this had expired in September 2013.  The firm had applied for a renewal of the licence and had been for a renewal interview with HSE on 1 October. However this had resulted in an outright refusal based on inadequate performance.

Asbestos Damage Limitations Ltd, Coleridge Street, Hove, East Sussex, was fined £15,000 and ordered to pay £4,000 in costs after admitting breaching Regulation 8(1) of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012.

After the hearing, HSE Inspector Denis Bodger said:

“ADL obviously decided to ignore the fact that its asbestos licence had expired and also that the application to renew had been refused. Instead it carried on regardless and went ahead with work at the premises, removing a ceiling that contained asbestos insulation board.

“When ADL’s licence expired, the firm should have ceased to carry out any work with asbestos-containing materials that is required by licence.  ADL was fully aware of what types of activities are covered and knew perfectly well that it was illegal to undertake the work they did.

“Work with asbestos requires a high degree of regulatory control. It involves working with a category one carcinogen, with asbestos-related diseases causing some 4,500 deaths each year in the UK, as well as many serious illnesses. When this type of work is undertaken by an unlicensed company, HSE has no ability to ensure it is done safely.

“Non-compliance with asbestos-licensing requirements is not acceptable and HSE will continue to enforce the law to protect both workers and members of the public.”

HSE Myth Buster - Pub bans confetti

Issue

A sign at a pub says: "Customers please note: due to confetti being a health and safety issue, unfortunately we are requesting that you do not use any. Sorry for the inconvenience."

Panel decision

This is not and never was a health and safety issue. It is encouraging to note that after contact from HSE the pub manager has agreed to take the sign down. If the pub wants to ban confetti because of the clean up problems it creates that is their decision but they can’t hide behind the veil of health and safety!