Fee
for Intervention
Fee for Intervention (FFI) is the HSE’s
cost recovery regime implemented from 1 October 2012, under regulations 23 to
25 of The Health and Safety (Fees) Regulations 2012.
The fee payable by dutyholders found
to be in material breach of the law is £129.00
per hour. The total amount to be
recovered will be based on the amount of time it takes HSE to identify and
conclude its regulatory action, in relation to the material breach (including
associated office work), multiplied by the relevant hourly rate. This will include part hours.
A material breach is when, in the
opinion of the HSE inspector, there is, or has been, a contravention of health
and safety law that requires them to issue notice in writing of that opinion to
the dutyholder.
Written notification from an HSE
inspector may be by a notification of contravention, an improvement or
prohibition notice, or a prosecution and must include the following
information:
·
The law that the inspector’s opinion
relates to;
·
The reasons for their opinion; and
·
Notification that a fee is payable to
the HSE.
Dutyholders who are compliant with
the law, or where a breach is not material, will not be charged FFI for any
work that HSE does with them.
Source: www.hse.gov.uk
HSE prosecution round up:
Firm fines £1million after
young worker killed by exploding tyre
A Kent tyre company has been sentenced for safety failings after
21-year-old Matthew Hoare, from Canterbury was killed when a tyre exploded.
Canterbury Crown Court heard how Matthew, an employee of Watling
Tyre Service Limited of Kent, was repairing a puncture to the tyre of a
‘dresser loading shovel’ when it exploded.
An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found
that Matthew was working on his own with inadequate work equipment which was
not properly maintained. He was not trained or competent to undertake the work
he was told to complete.
After the hearing, HSE Principal Inspector Mike Walters said:
“Employees need to be provided with properly maintained
equipment and the correct equipment to undertake tasks whilst out on site.
Employees also need to be trained and competent in the tasks they were asked to
undertake.”
Watling Tyre Service Limited pleaded guilty at a previous
hearing on 29 January 2016, to breaches of Section 2(1) and 3(1) of the Health
and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 and were fined £1 million and ordered to pay
costs of £99,485.
Firm fined for safety failings
at property development
A company based in Cardiff has been fined for safety failings
during a property development.
Pontypridd Magistrates’ Court heard Ziman Trading Limited,
formerly Ziman Investments Limited (Ziman), was acting as the principal
contractor at the property development of the former New York Hotel, York
Street, Porth.
An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found
that the company failed to ensure that appropriate measures were in place to
control risks on site, including falls from height, exposure to asbestos and
the risk from fire.
The company failed to effectively plan and manage the work which
put workers at risk. Ziman did not co-operate with the investigation and failed
to comply with enforcement action taken by the HSE.
Ziman Trading Limited, of Cefn Coed Road, Cyncoed, Cardiff,
pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 13(1) of the Construction (Design and
Management) Regulations 2015 and Section 33(1)(G) of the Health and Safety at
Work etc. Act 1974. The company was
fined £50,000 and ordered to pay costs of £5,478.
Roofer fined for unsafe roof
work
A Bracknell based roofer has been fined for safety failings after
a complaint was made to HSE regarding unsafe roof work.
No-one was injured in the incident at Sabine Gates, Old
Bracknell Lane, Bracknell on 27 August 2014, however members of the public were
endangered by the potential for falling objects.
Reading Magistrates’ Court heard that Terry Colwell trading as T
Colwell Roofing from Bracknell, had been contracted to undertake roof repairs
to the property by Grosvenor Court (Bracknell) Management Company Limited
(Grosvenor Court).
Terry Colwell chose to carry out the work without a scaffold,
working at heights of up to eight metres with no fall protection or falling
object protection to protect members of the public.
An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE)
established that Terry Colwell undertook the work for £650. The price of a scaffold would have been
between £1400 and £1500.
Terry Colwell, trading as T Colwell Roofing, of Hardwell Way,
Harmans Water, Bracknell, was fined a total of £2,000 and ordered to pay £1,966
in costs after pleading guilty to a single breach of the Health and Safety at
Work etc Act 1974.
After the hearing HSE Inspector John Caboche said:
“This was a serious incident that could have ended in tragedy
for Mr Colwell or a member of the public had he fallen or had a loose roof tile
been dislodged during the repairs. The
incident was wholly preventable and could have been avoided had Mr Colwell used
a scaffold and not undercut the other roofing company and if the operation been
better planned and managed. It is
essential that roof work is carefully assessed by competent persons, with a
plan in place to prevent falls of persons and objects. Roof work remains one of the most dangerous
activities in the construction sphere. Terry
Colwell was fully aware of the dangers of roof work and HSE publishes extensive
guidance that is readily available of how to safely manage this type of work.”
BT fined £500,000 after
engineer breaks his back in fall
British Telecom plc (BT) has been fined £500,000 after an
engineer fell seven metres from a loft in London, breaking his back and his
ankles.
The Old Bailey heard how a BT engineer, David Spurgeon, was
fixing a telephone fault in the roof void of a residential block of flats in
Tower Hamlets, East London. Mr Spurgeon
was working alone when he lost his balance and fell through the ceiling,
landing on a concrete stairwell, sustaining his serious injuries.
An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) into
the incident which occurred in May 2011 found there were a number of management
failures by BT, including inadequate planning of work taking place near fragile
surfaces and checking that it was carried out safely.
British Telecom plc, of Newgate Street, London, was found guilty
of breaching Section 2(1) of the Safety and Health at Work etc Act 1974 and was
fined £500,000 and ordered to pay costs of £98,913.51. In his sentencing
remarks the judge criticised BT for attempting to blame its own engineers for
the incident. He described their approach as being ‘not necessary, misplaced,
and unfortunate’.
HSE inspector Kevin Smith said:
“David Spurgeon is lucky to be alive. There were a number of failures of health and
safety management by BT which related to planning the work, supervision, and
checking it was being carried out safely. Work at height needs to be properly
planned, and this incident could have been prevented.”
Worker contracts allergic
contact dermatitis
A company based in Hereford which manufactures rubber sealants has been fined after a worker contracted allergic contact dermatitis.
Hereford Magistrates’ Court heard how an employee contracted the
skin disease after being exposed to sensitising ingredients in rubber
compounds.
An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found
that the company failed to assess risks from products used or manage those
risks. The company’s health and safety
advisor failed to understand the underlying issues to the level required for
the company to understand its responsibilities.
TRP Polymer Solutions Limited, of Netherwood Road, Rotherwas
Industrial Estate, Hereford, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2 of the
Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974, and Regulations 6 and 11 of the Control
of Substances hazardous to Health 2002 (COSHH), and was fined £40,000 and
ordered to pay costs of £6,529.
Paula Underwood, of Slaughter Castle, Kimbolton, Leominster,
Herefordshire, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 3(2) of the Health and
Safety at Work etc. Act 1974, and was fined £1,000 and ordered to pay costs of
£200.
Worker suffers serious injury
from contact with overhead power line
A stonemasonry company in Perth has been fined after an
apprentice stonemason was seriously injured from contact with an overhead power
line.
Perth Sheriff Court heard how 20 year old apprentice Rodd
McFarlane was working for T&M Stonemasonry, carrying out repairs at
Waulkmill Cottage in Perth.
During this work, McFarlane erected a tower scaffold to carry
out some re-pointing work.
While on the scaffold he came into contact with overhead 240 volt
electricity power lines that were supplying the cottage. The wind caused the power line to brush against
his back causing him to turn around instinctively and grab the live wire. The flow of the current meant he was unable to
let go for a few seconds until he jumped down from the board on the tower
scaffold. His weight broke the wire and
interrupted the flow of current. He
received an electric shock and suffered burns to both hands requiring graft
surgery and a possible future amputation of a little finger.
An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) into
the incident which occurred on 2 August 2012 found that the stone masonry
company should have developed a safe system of work.
T&M Stonemasonry, of Highfield Road, Scone, Perth, pleaded
guilty to breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974,
and was fined £16,000.
HSE Health and Safety Myths
Buster
We might be watching the Euro 2016 competition at the moment,
but this myth has a football flavour!
Builder quits job after being
ordered to remove flags put up to support England in the World Cup
Issue
A furious builder has quit his job in London after he was
ordered to remove two flags which he put up to support England in the World
Cup.
Panel decision
Health and safety law does not stop anyone supporting their team
and celebrating major sporting events. It seems that a key reason for taking
these England flags down was that workers of other nationalities might also
want to do the same in support of their own national teams but it’s difficult
to see why that would be a problem and certainly not a health and safety one!
No comments:
Post a Comment