Architects fined for safety failings in care home construction
- A firm of architects has been fined for safety failings in the construction of a new timber frame care home in Hemlington.
Teesside Magistrates’ Court heard that Mario Minchella Ltd had not given contractors relevant information about the flammability of the timber frame used in the construction of the new building in October 2012.
A routine inspection of the work by a Health and Safety Executive (HSE) inspector found that the separation distance between the new timber frame building under construction and an adjacent occupied care home was insufficient.
As a result, had the timber frame caught fire there was a serious risk that the radiant heat would cause the fire to spread to the care home, putting the lives of residents and staff inside at risk.
HSE found that there was nothing in the design specification produced by Mario Minchella Ltd to alert construction workers erecting the timber frame to the additional fire risk it created, and the need to take action accordingly.
The court was told that it would have been reasonable for Mario Minchella Ltd to have specified in its design that fire-resistant timber be used or that it considered the sequence of construction so that the timber frame of each floor was clad before the next one was constructed, reducing the amount of timber exposed at any one time.
Mario Minchella Ltd, of Swallow House, Parsons Road, Washington, Tyne and Wear, was fined a total of £1,500 after pleading guilty to two breaches of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007. The company was also ordered to pay £816 costs.
Speaking after the case, HSE inspector Andrea Robbins said:
“Timber frames will burn faster and more completely when the panels are incomplete and not yet protected by the usual internal fire-resistant plasterboard and external cladding.
“When burning, exposed timber frame structures generate a lot of radiant heat and there have been a number of large and serious fires which have affected neighbouring properties with devastating consequences, though thankfully without loss of life.
“There was a real danger here that had there been a fire it could have spread to the adjacent care home, putting the lives of the residents and staff inside at risk. Mario Minchella Ltd failed to consider this risk in its design and failed to provide sufficient information to the contractors to enable them to carry out the construction safely.”
A routine inspection of the work by a Health and Safety Executive (HSE) inspector found that the separation distance between the new timber frame building under construction and an adjacent occupied care home was insufficient.
As a result, had the timber frame caught fire there was a serious risk that the radiant heat would cause the fire to spread to the care home, putting the lives of residents and staff inside at risk.
HSE found that there was nothing in the design specification produced by Mario Minchella Ltd to alert construction workers erecting the timber frame to the additional fire risk it created, and the need to take action accordingly.
The court was told that it would have been reasonable for Mario Minchella Ltd to have specified in its design that fire-resistant timber be used or that it considered the sequence of construction so that the timber frame of each floor was clad before the next one was constructed, reducing the amount of timber exposed at any one time.
Mario Minchella Ltd, of Swallow House, Parsons Road, Washington, Tyne and Wear, was fined a total of £1,500 after pleading guilty to two breaches of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007. The company was also ordered to pay £816 costs.
Speaking after the case, HSE inspector Andrea Robbins said:
“Timber frames will burn faster and more completely when the panels are incomplete and not yet protected by the usual internal fire-resistant plasterboard and external cladding.
“When burning, exposed timber frame structures generate a lot of radiant heat and there have been a number of large and serious fires which have affected neighbouring properties with devastating consequences, though thankfully without loss of life.
“There was a real danger here that had there been a fire it could have spread to the adjacent care home, putting the lives of the residents and staff inside at risk. Mario Minchella Ltd failed to consider this risk in its design and failed to provide sufficient information to the contractors to enable them to carry out the construction safely.”
Plasterer breaks back in fall at Cheshire mansion
- A Cheshire building firm has been fined after a plasterer broke his back when he fell three metres during the construction of a six-bedroom house.
CB Homes Ltd, which was the main contractor for the development in Little Budworth, was prosecuted by the HSE after an investigation found the company had failed to make sure adequate guard rails were in place on the first floor landing to prevent falls.
Trafford Magistrates’ Court heard that the 58-year-old from Wrexham, who has asked not to be named, had been fitting plasterboard when he fell from the open landing on 22 May 2013. He suffered two cracked vertebrae along with damage to his spine, hips and legs.
The court was told CB Homes had been managing a project to build seven new homes at Mondrem Green on Chester Road. The company had hired a plastering firm to plaster the inside of the houses but failed to make sure this work could be carried out safely.
The plasterer had needed to use a ladder to reach the first floor, and there was no guard rail in place along the open edge on the landing. He was carrying a piece of plasterboard when he lost his footing and fell to the ground floor below.
CB Homes Ltd, of High Street in Tarporley, was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay £1,376 in prosecution costs after pleading guilty to two breaches of the Work at Height Regulations 2005.
Speaking after the hearing, HSE Inspector Laura Moran said:
“A plasterer suffered serious injuries in the fall which could, and should, have been prevented.
“As the principal contractor on the site, CB Homes was responsible for making sure work at height could be carried out safely. If the company had planned and supervised the work properly then it could have made sure guard rails were in place.
“Companies who take on big construction projects have a legal duty to make sure the tradesmen they bring onto the site can do their job safely. CB Homes fell well below that legal requirement on this occasion.”
Trafford Magistrates’ Court heard that the 58-year-old from Wrexham, who has asked not to be named, had been fitting plasterboard when he fell from the open landing on 22 May 2013. He suffered two cracked vertebrae along with damage to his spine, hips and legs.
The court was told CB Homes had been managing a project to build seven new homes at Mondrem Green on Chester Road. The company had hired a plastering firm to plaster the inside of the houses but failed to make sure this work could be carried out safely.
The plasterer had needed to use a ladder to reach the first floor, and there was no guard rail in place along the open edge on the landing. He was carrying a piece of plasterboard when he lost his footing and fell to the ground floor below.
CB Homes Ltd, of High Street in Tarporley, was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay £1,376 in prosecution costs after pleading guilty to two breaches of the Work at Height Regulations 2005.
“A plasterer suffered serious injuries in the fall which could, and should, have been prevented.
“As the principal contractor on the site, CB Homes was responsible for making sure work at height could be carried out safely. If the company had planned and supervised the work properly then it could have made sure guard rails were in place.
“Companies who take on big construction projects have a legal duty to make sure the tradesmen they bring onto the site can do their job safely. CB Homes fell well below that legal requirement on this occasion.”
Safety failings land scaffolding firm in court
- A Carmarthenshire scaffolding company has been fined for safety failings that exposed workers to serious risks of injury from a fall.
It follows an inspection on 22 May 2014 by the HSE at a site in Old Station Road, Carmarthen, next to the safety regulator’s local office.
At the time, a scaffolder was seen standing on a platform only two boards wide at a height of approximately four metres. There were no guard rails in place or any other means to prevent a fall, such as the use of a harness.
Llanelli Magistrates’ Court heard that it wasn’t the first time that HSE had been forced to take action against Castle Scaffolding (Wales) Ltd for unsafe work at height.
The company had previously received written warnings from HSE. The first occasion in January 2012 resulted in a Prohibition Notice being issued and the second occasion in September 2013 resulted in the company receiving a Notice of Contravention. Both instances concerned unsafe systems of work relating to the erection and dismantling of scaffolding.
Castle Scaffolding (Wales) Ltd, of Old Coal Yard, Tir Onnen, Station Road, St Clears, Carmarthenshire, was fined a total of £10,600 and ordered to pay £2,500 in costs after pleading guilty to breaching Regulation 4(1) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005 and Regulation 5 of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999.
Speaking after the case, HSE Inspector Hayley Healey said:
“While it is fortunate that no-one was injured during the work in Old Station Road, the erection and dismantling of the scaffold was clearly unsafe, and those working on the scaffolding were exposed unnecessarily to high levels of risk.
“Death and serious injury following falls from height are all too common, and proper planning is vital to ensure the work is carried out safely and that the correct precautions are identified and used at all times.
“Castle Scaffolding fell far short of the standards required to ensure that work was carried out in a safe manner. It is of particular concern that the company failed to implement adequate monitoring of health and safety standards following previous intervention and advice by HSE inspectors.”
At the time, a scaffolder was seen standing on a platform only two boards wide at a height of approximately four metres. There were no guard rails in place or any other means to prevent a fall, such as the use of a harness.
Llanelli Magistrates’ Court heard that it wasn’t the first time that HSE had been forced to take action against Castle Scaffolding (Wales) Ltd for unsafe work at height.
The company had previously received written warnings from HSE. The first occasion in January 2012 resulted in a Prohibition Notice being issued and the second occasion in September 2013 resulted in the company receiving a Notice of Contravention. Both instances concerned unsafe systems of work relating to the erection and dismantling of scaffolding.
Castle Scaffolding (Wales) Ltd, of Old Coal Yard, Tir Onnen, Station Road, St Clears, Carmarthenshire, was fined a total of £10,600 and ordered to pay £2,500 in costs after pleading guilty to breaching Regulation 4(1) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005 and Regulation 5 of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999.
Speaking after the case, HSE Inspector Hayley Healey said:
“While it is fortunate that no-one was injured during the work in Old Station Road, the erection and dismantling of the scaffold was clearly unsafe, and those working on the scaffolding were exposed unnecessarily to high levels of risk.
“Death and serious injury following falls from height are all too common, and proper planning is vital to ensure the work is carried out safely and that the correct precautions are identified and used at all times.
“Castle Scaffolding fell far short of the standards required to ensure that work was carried out in a safe manner. It is of particular concern that the company failed to implement adequate monitoring of health and safety standards following previous intervention and advice by HSE inspectors.”
Contractor’s safety failings led to employee’s life-changing injuries
- A Melksham construction company has been prosecuted after a crane operator suffered an electric shock when the equipment he was using came into contact with overhead power lines.
Sub-contractor Lee Burge 38, who lives near Bristol, was using the crane to move sections of steel at Trowbridge Rugby Club on 20 March 2013, where a new clubhouse and play area were being built by Ashford Homes (South Western) Ltd.
Swindon Crown Court heard that as Mr Burge started to lift a section of steel using the crane, the hook block came into contact with an 11kV power line and he suffered an electric shock. Mr Burge was resuscitated but now suffers from long term memory loss.
An investigation by the HSE established that Ashford Homes had been warned by the electricity company about the presence of overhead power cables, and had received advice on the removal of the power supplies running across the site. However, no measures were put in place by the company to prevent plant and equipment accessing the area beneath the power lines or for the power supply to be diverted or isolated.
Ashford Homes (South Western) Ltd of Merlin Way, Bower Hill, Melksham, was fined £20,000 and ordered to pay costs of £5,159 after pleading guilty to breaching Regulation 34(2) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007.
Speaking after sentencing HSE inspector Ian Whittles, said:
“Work near overhead power lines should be carefully planned and managed so that risks from contact or close proximity to the lines are adequately controlled. Ashford Homes failed to do this, and had been operating a range of machinery capable of coming close to the lines before Mr Burge was seriously injured.
“Luckily Mr Burge was resuscitated, but he now suffers from life changing complications due the electric shock he received. He was extremely close to losing his life and this is down to the failure of the construction company to adopt a safe system of work.
“This terrible incident could have been avoided had the company placed physical barriers on site so that no plant or equipment could gain access to either side and directly below the overhead power lines, or if the hive voltage cables were diverted or isolated.”
Swindon Crown Court heard that as Mr Burge started to lift a section of steel using the crane, the hook block came into contact with an 11kV power line and he suffered an electric shock. Mr Burge was resuscitated but now suffers from long term memory loss.
An investigation by the HSE established that Ashford Homes had been warned by the electricity company about the presence of overhead power cables, and had received advice on the removal of the power supplies running across the site. However, no measures were put in place by the company to prevent plant and equipment accessing the area beneath the power lines or for the power supply to be diverted or isolated.
Ashford Homes (South Western) Ltd of Merlin Way, Bower Hill, Melksham, was fined £20,000 and ordered to pay costs of £5,159 after pleading guilty to breaching Regulation 34(2) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007.
Speaking after sentencing HSE inspector Ian Whittles, said:
“Work near overhead power lines should be carefully planned and managed so that risks from contact or close proximity to the lines are adequately controlled. Ashford Homes failed to do this, and had been operating a range of machinery capable of coming close to the lines before Mr Burge was seriously injured.
“Luckily Mr Burge was resuscitated, but he now suffers from life changing complications due the electric shock he received. He was extremely close to losing his life and this is down to the failure of the construction company to adopt a safe system of work.
“This terrible incident could have been avoided had the company placed physical barriers on site so that no plant or equipment could gain access to either side and directly below the overhead power lines, or if the hive voltage cables were diverted or isolated.”
Contractor fined for potential asbestos risk
- A County Durham contractor has been sentenced after illegally removing asbestos from a garage, putting himself, other workers and the householder at risk of exposure.
John Simpson, trading as Dun N Dusted and offering waste removal services, was paid £900 by a householder to remove asbestos from a garage under his house in Jesmond, Newcastle. He had told the owner he was licensed to remove the dangerous material despite not being so.
On 25 April 2013, Mr Simpson arrived at the property with two other men. Working alone inside the garage and wearing paper overalls and a face mask, Mr Simpson spent most of the afternoon taking down the asbestos insulating board ceiling using a hammer and chisel.
The other men then helped to bag the asbestos debris and loaded some 20 bags into Mr Simpson’s van, parked outside the house.
A neighbour, who was concerned about the way the work was carried out, contacted the HSE. Inspectors stopped Mr Simpson undertaking any similar work by serving a Prohibition Notice and investigated the incident.
Newcastle Magistrates’ Court heard that HSE found that Mr Simpson was neither qualified or licensed to remove asbestos.
Mr Simpson failed to take suitable measures to prevent the spread of potentially deadly asbestos fibres – the debris had been simply cleared up using a brush and a domestic vacuum cleaner before being bagged and loaded into the van.
The court was told the nature of the work meant that it should have been notified to HSE and that Mr Simpson had not carried out any risk assessment nor identified the type of asbestos contained in the garage. He had not prepared a written plan of work and the equipment and clothing he used did not offer adequate protection from exposure.
No air sampling had been carried out and Mr Simpson did not produce a certificate for reoccupation once the work was complete.
John Simpson, 41, of Portland Avenue, Deneside, Seaham was fined a total of £1,500 and ordered to pay £1,383 in costs after pleading guilty to two breaches of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012.
Speaking after the case HSE inspector Sal Brecken said: “Asbestos is the single greatest cause of work-related deaths in the UK, with some 4,500 deaths each year due to asbestos-related diseases, as well as many serious illnesses.
“For this reason, work with asbestos requires a high degree of regulatory control to ensure it is carried out safely. Mr Simpson decided to ignore the fact an asbestos licence was required to undertake this work and his actions not only put him at risk, but also the householder and those working alongside him.
“Full compliance with asbestos legislation, in particular licensing requirements, is absolutely essential. HSE will continue to vigorously enforce the law to protect both workers and members of the public from exposure to this deadly substance.”
She added: “When sentencing Mr Simpson, the magistrates said they considered this breach very serious and a custodial sentence was strongly considered but due to it being his first health and safety offence they decided to deal with it by way of a fine.”
On 25 April 2013, Mr Simpson arrived at the property with two other men. Working alone inside the garage and wearing paper overalls and a face mask, Mr Simpson spent most of the afternoon taking down the asbestos insulating board ceiling using a hammer and chisel.
The other men then helped to bag the asbestos debris and loaded some 20 bags into Mr Simpson’s van, parked outside the house.
A neighbour, who was concerned about the way the work was carried out, contacted the HSE. Inspectors stopped Mr Simpson undertaking any similar work by serving a Prohibition Notice and investigated the incident.
Newcastle Magistrates’ Court heard that HSE found that Mr Simpson was neither qualified or licensed to remove asbestos.
Mr Simpson failed to take suitable measures to prevent the spread of potentially deadly asbestos fibres – the debris had been simply cleared up using a brush and a domestic vacuum cleaner before being bagged and loaded into the van.
The court was told the nature of the work meant that it should have been notified to HSE and that Mr Simpson had not carried out any risk assessment nor identified the type of asbestos contained in the garage. He had not prepared a written plan of work and the equipment and clothing he used did not offer adequate protection from exposure.
No air sampling had been carried out and Mr Simpson did not produce a certificate for reoccupation once the work was complete.
John Simpson, 41, of Portland Avenue, Deneside, Seaham was fined a total of £1,500 and ordered to pay £1,383 in costs after pleading guilty to two breaches of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012.
Speaking after the case HSE inspector Sal Brecken said: “Asbestos is the single greatest cause of work-related deaths in the UK, with some 4,500 deaths each year due to asbestos-related diseases, as well as many serious illnesses.
“For this reason, work with asbestos requires a high degree of regulatory control to ensure it is carried out safely. Mr Simpson decided to ignore the fact an asbestos licence was required to undertake this work and his actions not only put him at risk, but also the householder and those working alongside him.
“Full compliance with asbestos legislation, in particular licensing requirements, is absolutely essential. HSE will continue to vigorously enforce the law to protect both workers and members of the public from exposure to this deadly substance.”
She added: “When sentencing Mr Simpson, the magistrates said they considered this breach very serious and a custodial sentence was strongly considered but due to it being his first health and safety offence they decided to deal with it by way of a fine.”
Suspended sentence for unregistered plumber who failed to spot boiler faults
- A Derbyshire plumber has appeared in court for carrying out gas work without being registered and for failing to notice faults on an unsafe boiler.
Northern Derbyshire Magistrates’ Court heard that between December 2012 and February 2014, Christopher Buck carried out gas work at a number of properties without being registered with Gas Safe, as the law requires.
It was a deliberate breach because he knew of the need to be formally accredited after previously allowing an earlier registration to lapse.
An investigation by the HSE on 27 November 2013 revealed that Mr Buck had serviced a boiler at a house in Inkersall but failed to carry out all the necessary safety checks. He did not spot that pipe work was not properly sealed, which meant the boiler was unsafe and posed a potential risk to those living in the property.
Christopher Buck of Mansfield Road, Hillstown, Bolsover, pleaded guilty to breaching Regulations 3(3) and 26(9) of the Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998. He was sentenced to six months in prison, suspended for 12 months, for both breaches, to run concurrently. He was also ordered to carry out 200 hours of unpaid community work and to pay costs of £748.
After the hearing, HSE inspector Edward Walker said:
“Mr Buck knew there was a requirement to be registered and that he should not have been carrying out the work, so there was a deliberate breach. Not only was he not registered but he did not take due diligence when it came to carrying out the safety checks as part of the boiler service. Subsequently, he was leaving the people in the property at risk.”
Russell Krämer, chief executive of Gas Safe Register, commented:
“It is a legal requirement for all engineers working on gas to be registered. By not doing so, they are putting people’s lives in danger.
It was a deliberate breach because he knew of the need to be formally accredited after previously allowing an earlier registration to lapse.
An investigation by the HSE on 27 November 2013 revealed that Mr Buck had serviced a boiler at a house in Inkersall but failed to carry out all the necessary safety checks. He did not spot that pipe work was not properly sealed, which meant the boiler was unsafe and posed a potential risk to those living in the property.
Christopher Buck of Mansfield Road, Hillstown, Bolsover, pleaded guilty to breaching Regulations 3(3) and 26(9) of the Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998. He was sentenced to six months in prison, suspended for 12 months, for both breaches, to run concurrently. He was also ordered to carry out 200 hours of unpaid community work and to pay costs of £748.
After the hearing, HSE inspector Edward Walker said:
“Mr Buck knew there was a requirement to be registered and that he should not have been carrying out the work, so there was a deliberate breach. Not only was he not registered but he did not take due diligence when it came to carrying out the safety checks as part of the boiler service. Subsequently, he was leaving the people in the property at risk.”
Russell Krämer, chief executive of Gas Safe Register, commented:
“It is a legal requirement for all engineers working on gas to be registered. By not doing so, they are putting people’s lives in danger.
Firm fined after worker seriously injured in fall
- A Jedburgh firm has been fined for safety failings after a worker was severely injured when he fell down a lift shaft as he was transporting a loaded cage trolley that landed on top of him.
James Douglas, then 62, of Jedburgh, was working for The L S Starrett Company Ltd at its premises in Oxnam Road, Jedburgh, when the incident happened on 20 June 2013.
Jedburgh Sheriff Court heard that Mr Douglas, who had worked for the company for 46 years, was transporting a loaded cage trolley, weighing around 519kg in total, from the upper level of the despatch area to the lower level using one of the three table lifts.
He saw that the lift gates were open, but the platform was not at the upper level so he moved to edge of the lift shaft to look down and see if anyone was using the lift at the lower level.
However, as he looked down he lost his balance and fell down into lift shaft, landing on the platform two metres below. The loaded cage then fell on top of him, trapping him from the top of his legs to his feet until colleagues arrived to free him.
He suffered several severe fractures to his right hip and heel as well as tissue damage to his sciatic nerve, knees and lower legs, and had to undergo surgery that included the insertion of four screws in his hip.
The court heard that immediately following the incident the company prohibited the use of all the table lifts in the factory until it had carried out a full internal investigation and implemented any changes identified. This led to the installation of interlocks and sensor switches on the lift shaft access gates, which prevented them from being open when the platform was not in position.
An investigation by the HSE revealed that had The L S Starrett Company Ltd carried out a suitable risk assessment in advance it would have identified the fact that it was possible for the gates at the upper level to be opened even if the platform was at the lower level, which exposed workers to the risk of falling down the lift shaft.
There was a duty on the company to maintain safe equipment and systems of work and it would have been reasonably practicable for it to have installed interlocks and platform positioning sensors which work automatically, and are thus effective at preventing entry into an exposed lift shaft.
The lifts were subject to a thorough examination every six months, as required under legislation, but the contractor had failed to notice this issue.
The L S Starrett Company Ltd, of Oxnam Road, Jedburgh, was fined £3,000 after pleading guilty to breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974.
Following the case, HSE inspector Norman Buchanan said:
“This incident could have easily been avoided if The L S Starrett Company Ltd had carried out a risk assessment, which would have identified the fact that the upper level gates could be opened when the platform was not there.
“It would have been reasonably practicable for the company to have installed inter-locks and platform positioning sensors, as they did later. Such devices are considered as a standard requirement in lift installations throughout residential, industrial and commercial buildings, and their omission in this case was a critical factor in the cause of this incident.
“The fact that the company did install such devices afterwards shows that this was a reasonably practicable measure which they could have taken, had they done so Mr Douglas would not have suffered such serious injuries.”
Jedburgh Sheriff Court heard that Mr Douglas, who had worked for the company for 46 years, was transporting a loaded cage trolley, weighing around 519kg in total, from the upper level of the despatch area to the lower level using one of the three table lifts.
He saw that the lift gates were open, but the platform was not at the upper level so he moved to edge of the lift shaft to look down and see if anyone was using the lift at the lower level.
However, as he looked down he lost his balance and fell down into lift shaft, landing on the platform two metres below. The loaded cage then fell on top of him, trapping him from the top of his legs to his feet until colleagues arrived to free him.
He suffered several severe fractures to his right hip and heel as well as tissue damage to his sciatic nerve, knees and lower legs, and had to undergo surgery that included the insertion of four screws in his hip.
The court heard that immediately following the incident the company prohibited the use of all the table lifts in the factory until it had carried out a full internal investigation and implemented any changes identified. This led to the installation of interlocks and sensor switches on the lift shaft access gates, which prevented them from being open when the platform was not in position.
An investigation by the HSE revealed that had The L S Starrett Company Ltd carried out a suitable risk assessment in advance it would have identified the fact that it was possible for the gates at the upper level to be opened even if the platform was at the lower level, which exposed workers to the risk of falling down the lift shaft.
There was a duty on the company to maintain safe equipment and systems of work and it would have been reasonably practicable for it to have installed interlocks and platform positioning sensors which work automatically, and are thus effective at preventing entry into an exposed lift shaft.
The lifts were subject to a thorough examination every six months, as required under legislation, but the contractor had failed to notice this issue.
The L S Starrett Company Ltd, of Oxnam Road, Jedburgh, was fined £3,000 after pleading guilty to breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974.
Following the case, HSE inspector Norman Buchanan said:
“This incident could have easily been avoided if The L S Starrett Company Ltd had carried out a risk assessment, which would have identified the fact that the upper level gates could be opened when the platform was not there.
“It would have been reasonably practicable for the company to have installed inter-locks and platform positioning sensors, as they did later. Such devices are considered as a standard requirement in lift installations throughout residential, industrial and commercial buildings, and their omission in this case was a critical factor in the cause of this incident.
“The fact that the company did install such devices afterwards shows that this was a reasonably practicable measure which they could have taken, had they done so Mr Douglas would not have suffered such serious injuries.”
Furniture manufacturer sentenced over worker’s hand injury
- Furniture manufacturer Ercol has been fined for safety failings after an employee suffered severe injuries when his hand was caught in poorly-guarded machinery.
The 42-year old from High Wycombe, who does not wish to be named, was using a lathe machine to produce chair legs at Ercol Furniture Ltd’s factory in Buckinghamshire on 4 October 2013.
When he decided to change the felt on the drill locators, he reached across the machine to access a vertical drill at the rear. However, the drill started to operate, caught his hand and completely pierced his right palm. He managed to free himself by pushing his right arm down with his left hand and was taken to hospital. He needed an operation to repair the wound and was unable to work for around three months. He has now returned to Ercol, although not on the lathe machine.
The HSE investigated and prosecuted Ercol Furniture Ltd for safety breaches at High Wycombe Magistrates’ Court.
The court heard that HSE found the lathe machine was inadequately guarded, leaving employees at risk of getting caught in dangerous moving parts. Ercol had also failed to properly assess the risks associated with operating the machine, especially as the worker had only started using the lathe two months prior to the incident.
Ercol had since installed a perimeter fence around the machine which now prevents access to the drill.
Ercol Furniture Ltd, of Summerleys Road, Princes Risborough, Buckinghamshire, was fined £8,000 and ordered to pay costs of £816 after pleading guilty to breaching Regulation 11(1) of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 and Regulation 3 of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999.
Following the case, HSE inspector Karl Howes said:
“Incidents involving this type of machinery can cause serious, life-changing injuries, which is why onus is on employers to ensure that appropriate guards and systems of work are in place to protect workers from dangerous moving parts.
“The painful injury to this employee could easily have been avoided but Ercol failed in its responsibilities to assess what risks this piece of equipment presented and to put measures in place to address them.
“There are several deaths and many more injuries each year due to incidents where workers have been using unguarded or poorly-guarded machines, and most of these are easily prevented. Companies have a legal duty to ensure dangerous parts are effectively guarded before a machine is used, whether or not these are provided by the manufacturer.”
When he decided to change the felt on the drill locators, he reached across the machine to access a vertical drill at the rear. However, the drill started to operate, caught his hand and completely pierced his right palm. He managed to free himself by pushing his right arm down with his left hand and was taken to hospital. He needed an operation to repair the wound and was unable to work for around three months. He has now returned to Ercol, although not on the lathe machine.
The HSE investigated and prosecuted Ercol Furniture Ltd for safety breaches at High Wycombe Magistrates’ Court.
The court heard that HSE found the lathe machine was inadequately guarded, leaving employees at risk of getting caught in dangerous moving parts. Ercol had also failed to properly assess the risks associated with operating the machine, especially as the worker had only started using the lathe two months prior to the incident.
Ercol had since installed a perimeter fence around the machine which now prevents access to the drill.
Ercol Furniture Ltd, of Summerleys Road, Princes Risborough, Buckinghamshire, was fined £8,000 and ordered to pay costs of £816 after pleading guilty to breaching Regulation 11(1) of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 and Regulation 3 of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999.
Following the case, HSE inspector Karl Howes said:
“Incidents involving this type of machinery can cause serious, life-changing injuries, which is why onus is on employers to ensure that appropriate guards and systems of work are in place to protect workers from dangerous moving parts.
“The painful injury to this employee could easily have been avoided but Ercol failed in its responsibilities to assess what risks this piece of equipment presented and to put measures in place to address them.
“There are several deaths and many more injuries each year due to incidents where workers have been using unguarded or poorly-guarded machines, and most of these are easily prevented. Companies have a legal duty to ensure dangerous parts are effectively guarded before a machine is used, whether or not these are provided by the manufacturer.”
No comments:
Post a Comment