One in two
basement sites in top London boroughs fails safety inspections
Almost half of domestic basement
projects across three London boroughs failed unannounced safety checks during a
two-day initiative, figures reveal.
The inspection initiative undertaken by
the HSE, saw a team of inspectors visit 127 sites across Hammersmith and
Fulham, Kensington and Chelsea, and parts of Westminster.
Enforcement action was taken at 62 of
those sites – an overall rate of 48% – with 44 Prohibition Notices served
requiring dangerous practices to stop with immediate effect, 12 Improvement
Notices served requiring safety improvements to be made and 63 Notifications of
Contravention served identifying material breaches.
In a similar inspection drive last year
the overall enforcement rate across 107 sites was one in three, or 36 per cent.
At two projects, conditions were so
dangerous that inspectors were forced to close the sites. More than two thirds
of the Prohibition Notices served dealt with the risk of workers falling from
height, either into unguarded excavations or through unprotected floor
openings, as well as unshored excavations. Inadequate welfare provision
accounted for half of the Improvement Notices.
James Hickman, lead HSE Inspector for
the Construction Division in the City and South West London, said:
“These enforcement figures reflect the
rapidly-increasing number of companies entering the basement industry to meet
the current high demand for basement living space in London. Those new to
basement construction work are often unaware of the risks associated with the
technically challenging nature of the work or of the standards required to
ensure the safety of their workforce.
“The overall picture is similar to other
targeted inspections of basement work in London where we identified the same
kind of problems relating to unsafe work at height and excavations, and poor
welfare facilities.
“That suggests the message isn’t getting
through, or that there is complacency towards health and safety across this
sector of the construction industry. But that is only partly the case.
“As well as serious safety
contraventions, we also found examples of better standards, often at sites
managed by companies who are known to HSE, some of whom have previously
received enforcement notices requiring improvements to be made.
“It illustrates that lessons have been
learned, and we hope the latest failings that required action will have a
similar impact with contractors new to the basement industry.”
Domestic basement projects are
technically-challenging and carry substantial risks. Common issues found during
the inspections were:
• Work not properly planned
• Failure to appoint a competent temporary works engineer to design suitable propping to support excavations and existing structures
• Poor or absent welfare facilities for workers
• Basic precautions missing, such as edge protection to prevent falls from height, especially into excavations
• Unguarded conveyor belts
• Failure to appoint a competent temporary works engineer to design suitable propping to support excavations and existing structures
• Poor or absent welfare facilities for workers
• Basic precautions missing, such as edge protection to prevent falls from height, especially into excavations
• Unguarded conveyor belts
Firm in court
for unsafe refurbishment work
A construction company has been fined
for unsafe refurbishment work that exposed workers to the risk of serious
injuries.
Inspectors from the HSE established that
safety standards were woefully lacking at a property undergoing an extensive
overhaul in Newton Avenue, Acton, between July 2013 to January 2014.
A basement was excavated without any
form of propping or temporary works to provide vital support, and later in the
project the risk of falls from height was also found to be poorly managed.
Westminster Magistrates’ Court heard
that FN Property Limited also failed to hold any valid Employers Liability
Compulsory Insurance for its workforce, which is a legal requirement to support
workers in the event of an incident occurring.
HSE twice served Prohibition Notices to
stop work linked to the refurbishment during visits in January 2014 to prevent
the risk of falls from height.
The first visit followed a complaint
from workers at the site about unsafe excavations where there was a serious
risk of collapse.
FN Property Limited, of Askew Road,
Shepherd’s Bush, W12, was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay a further £1,213 in
costs after pleading guilty to a single breach of the Health and Safety at Work
etc. Act 1974.
After the hearing, HSE Inspector Pete
Collingwood commented:
“The dangers posed by unsupported
excavations are well known in the construction industry, and it should have
been abundantly clear that the provision and use of shoring was a basic
necessity.
“Later in the project measures in place
to protect against falls from height were found to be inadequate on two
separate visits to site. To compound this, the contractor had no Employers
Liability Insurance in the event of an accident occurring.
“Every employer should ensure that
workers have the basic right to work in a safe environment. FN Property Ltd
fell some way short in this regard.”
Kent boys’
school fined over pupil’s head injuries
The governors of a boys’ school have
been prosecuted after a 14-year-old pupil was severely injured when he was hit
by a shot put thrown by another boy.
The incident happened during a routine
multi-sport PE lesson at The Judd School in Tonbridge on 20 June 2014. The
pupil had left a triple jump area and was standing on the edge of the shot put
landing zone to check a friend’s throw when he was struck on the back of his
head by a shot.
The pupil suffered life-threatening
injuries and needed emergency brain surgery on a fractured skull. He has now
returned to school but his injury has resulted in a permanent indentation at
the base of his skull.
The HSE investigated and identified the
school had not adopted measures in its own risk assessment and PE guidance on
multi-event lessons had not been followed.
Sevenoaks Magistrates were told that
there were 24 boys in the lesson, divided into six groups and taking part in
hurdles, long jump, triple jump, javelin, discus and shot put. It was a lesson
format used regularly at The Judd School and the pupils had participated in
similar lessons in previous years.
The six sports were spread across the
field but the end of the landing zone for the shot put was only about three
metres from the end of the triple jump sand pit, where the 14-year-old was
competing.
When the whistle blew to mark the end of
the session, he left the triple jump and went to the shot put to see how far
his friend had thrown. At the same time, another pupil was completing his
throw, turning as he did so he was facing away from the zone.
The shot hit the pupil on the back of
the head, causing a severely fractured skull and internal swelling. He was in
hospital for nearly a month but was able to return to school the following
term.
The court heard the teenager is no
longer able to take part in some contact sports and may suffer longer-term
issues.
HSE found the school had carried out a
risk assessment for PE lessons. However, although it had referenced the
guidance by the Association for Physical Education, it did not follow their
recommendation that such lessons be restricted to a maximum of four sports with
only one to be a throwing event.
The school’s inclusion of six sports
with three throwing events, had significantly increased the risks to pupils, as
had the proximity of the triple jump pit to the shot put landing zone.
The Governing Body of The Judd School,
Tonbridge, Kent, was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay £1,375 in costs after
admitting a breach of Section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act
1974. Magistrates agreed with HSE that the safety breach had been ‘substantial’
After the hearing, HSE inspector Kevin
Golding said:
“By not adopting the measures identified
in their own risk assessment, The Judd School put pupils at serious risk
leading to a 14-year-old boy being struck by a shot put and suffering
life-threatening injuries. It was a horrifying incident for him and his family
and, of course, the rest of the pupils and the school itself.
“While he is thankfully back at school,
he will have to live with the consequences of the incident for the rest of his
life.
“It is vitally important that schools
review their risk assessments for all PE lessons, but in particular for
multi-sports lessons, to check that they are safe.”
Leeds trader’s
suspended jail sentence over asbestos exposure
A trader has been given a suspended jail
sentence after exposing a household and workers to potentially dangerous levels
of asbestos fibres.
Clive Raper, 49, trading as Bramley
Asbestos Removals, took on a job to remove asbestos insulating board from the
garage of a couple’s home despite the fact that he did not hold the legal
licence required to carry out the specialist work.
He hired a couple of workers to help him
but totally failed to take any of the vital safety measures needed, or
implement the tight controls imposed by law, to protect workers, local people
and the environment when working with the material.
The HSE prosecuted Mr Raper for safety
breaches at Leeds Magistrates’ Court after investigating the incident in July
2011.
The court was told Mr Raper accepted the
job from the couple knowing full well he did not have the necessary licence to
do the work. He then took on a couple of labourers to help him, neither of whom
held licences.
Asbestos is a known carcinogen, and
asbestos-containing materials will release fibres into the air when damaged or
disturbed. If inhaled, they can lead to serious and fatal disease, often years
down the line.
Mr Raper had not used any of the
standard control measures that licensed operators employ, such as a protective
enclosure, full-face respiratory equipment, negative pressure units and
specialist vacuums.
The poor standards employed by Mr Raper
meant that asbestos debris and residue was left, compounding the risk to the
homeowners of exposure.
The homeowner was so concerned with how
Mr Raper had left the garage he contacted Leeds City Council. They identified a
suitable contractor who went to the home and carried out an environmental clean
of the property, at added cost to the homeowner. The council also reported the
matter to HSE
Clive Raper, trading as Bramley Asbestos
Removals, of Fawcett Gardens, Leeds (previously Summerfield Drive, Bramley),
was sentenced to eight months in prison, suspended for 12 months, and ordered
to pay a contribution of £260 toward costs after admitting a breach of the
Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 and a separate breach of the Control of
Asbestos Regulations.
After the hearing, HSE inspector Paul
Yeadon said:
“It is appalling that a trader who is
fully familiar with the restrictions governing asbestos wilfully ignores them
and puts a household and the workers he has hired in danger. It would appear
that he has put profit ahead of the health and wellbeing of others, and in this
case quite bafflingly, he put his own health at risk as well.
“We were unable to identify the two
workers involved as Mr Raper could not provide their full names or contact
details. We do think, however, that they were probably both exposed to asbestos
fibres above the action level.
“This kind of work must be carried out
by competent people with the necessary licence to do so.”
Materials
company prosecuted for worker’s crush injury
A global materials company has been
fined after a maintenance engineer’s hand was crushed at its factory.
Birmingham Magistrates’ Court heard that
the 40-year-old worker from Stourbridge was removing chocks from the bed of a
plate saw when the incident happened at ThyssenKrupp (Materials) UK Ltd’s site
in Tyseley on 9 July 2014.
The chocks had been used to prop a
pressure beam while maintenance work was carried out but as soon as the chocks
were removed, the beam fell on to the employee’s hand. He was off work for more
than three months but has since returned to the company.
A HSE investigation found the company, a
subsidiary of the ThyssenKrupp group, had failed to provide workers with
adequate information, instruction and training or appropriately manage the site
maintenance programme.
ThyssenKrupp (Materials) UK Ltd, of
Cox’s Lane, Cradley Heath, West Midlands, was fined £10,000 with £940.50 costs
after admitting a breach of Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work
etc Act 1974.
Speaking after the hearing, HSE
inspector Paul Cooper said:
“ThyssenKrupp Materials should have
spent time working out a safe working methods for all maintenance tasks,
especially those which were routine. There were no written risk assessments or
safe systems of work in place.
“The company should also have made sure
that the engineers were given the necessary training on the machines and the
information they needed to operate them. Instead, they were given nothing and
expected to learn as they went along.
“Since the incident the firm has brought
in service engineers to do the most intricate maintenance work and arranged for
those engineers to give the employees training on the machines. Had they done
this before, a worker could have been spared a painful injury.”
Waste recycling
firm prosecuted over worker’s crush injuries
A waste recycling firm has been fined
after a worker suffered severe crush injuries in an unsafe machine.
The 22-year-old, who has asked not to be
named, was clearing a blockage from a cardboard baler at Bakers Waste Services
Ltd’s Enderby site on 27 January 2014 when his left leg became trapped between
the static framework and moving bed.
It took firefighters three hours to free
him. He was in hospital for four weeks and underwent three operations to insert
metal rods and screws between his knee and ankle. He also required skin and
muscle grafts, and in some places the bones in his leg were so severely damaged
they are now missing.
A HSE investigation found the company
had failed to maintain guards and other protective devices on the baler.
Although guards were present they did not close properly meaning interlocking
devices and the electrical control circuit of the machine were not properly
activated.
Leicester Magistrates’ Court heard that
while the worker was clearing the blockage he inadvertently activated the baler
as there was also no safe system of work for safely isolating the power supply.
Bakers Waste Services Ltd, of Melton
Road, Thurmaston, Leicester was fined £12,000 and ordered to pay costs of
£3,577 after pleading guilty to breaching Section 3(1) of the Health and Safety
at Work etc Act 1974.
Speaking after the hearing, HSE
inspector Berian Price said:
“The incident was entirely preventable.
Bakers Waste Services fell below the standards expected of a competent
employer, standards which are well publicised and accepted within the industry.
The safety devices on the baler had been defective for a period of time yet it
took an horrific incident before they took action to remedy the problem.
“Incidents arising from dangerous parts
of machinery are unfortunately commonplace despite freely available guidance.
Around 12 people a year are killed and a further 40,000 injured due to
incidents involving machinery.”
