November

Western Power Distribution (South West) PLC of Bristol has pleaded guilty to breaching s3 (1) HSWA. The company was fined £200,000 and ordered to pay costs of £72,694.91 by Plymouth Crown Court.

The prosecution occurred following an incident on 1 January 2007 in which the then Vice Chancellor of Plymouth University, Professor Roland Levinsky (63) was walking his dog across a field at Warren Close, Wembury, Devon.

Professor Levinsky came into contact with a fallen 11,000-volt electricity cable and was fatally electrocuted. The electricity pole holding up the cable is believed to have come down in storms.

HSE inspector Steve Woods said:
"When it comes to ensuring that no-one is exposed to unnecessary risks, all employers have a duty of care towards members of the public as well as to their own employees. Clearly, in this case, the company should have heeded the warnings that its cables were unsafe after the recent bad weather and its failure to do so resulted in the tragic death of Professor Levinsky. Across Devon and Cornwall, there are many people working in industries, such as farming, quarries, construction and utilities, which 'interface' with the public. This tragic incident should act as a reminder to all those who manage the risks created by these industries to be alert and ensure that they take the necessary measures to protect members of the public."

Fatal fall

Sellafield Ltd and P C Richardson & Co. (Middlesbrough) Ltd (demolition contractors) have been fined after pleading guilty at Carlisle Crown Court to charges brought by HSE following the death of 36 year old Richardson employee Neil Cannon on 9 January 2003.

The incident happened whilst work was taking place to decommission one of the pile chimneys on the Sellafield site in Cumbria. Mr Cannon was removing steelwork inside the chimney when he fell approximately 95m and suffered fatal injuries.

Sellafield Ltd (then operating under the name of British Nuclear Fuels Ltd), of 1100 Daresbury Park, Daresbury, Warrington was fined £150,000 for a breach of s3 (1) HSWA in that it failed to conduct its undertaking in such a way as to ensure that persons not in its employment, but who were affected by it, were not exposed to risks to their safety. They were also ordered to pay £50,500 costs.

PC Richardson & Co (Middlesbrough) Ltd of Courville House, 34 Ellerbeck Court, Stokesley Business Park, Stokesley near Middlesbrough was fined £100,000 for a breach of s2 (1) HSWA in that it failed to conduct its undertaking in such a way as to ensure that its employees were not exposed to risks to their safety. They were also ordered to pay £25,000 costs.

HSE Principal Inspector Mark Cottriall says:
"This tragic accident need never have happened. A safe working method had been prepared for removing the steelwork in the chimney. If this had been followed, Mr Cannon would not have had to leave the safety of the working platform that had been built inside the chimney. As often happens on construction projects, however, the proposed method was changed as the work progressed. These changes took place over a period of time and resulted in workers, including Mr Cannon, having to work on an unprotected ledge inside the chimney approximately 95m above ground level. At the time of the accident, Mr Cannon was trying to remove a girder from the ledge. The girder tipped upwards, sliced through Mr Cannon's safety lanyard, and caused him to fall through the gap between the ledge and the working platform. Ongoing monitoring of the work in progress should have identified the changes and the increased risk. If this had been done it is almost certain that a way could have been found to do the work without leaving the safety of the platform.

As this case sadly illustrates, any changes to planned work methods must be identified and properly assessed to ensure that they are safe."

Sellafield Ltd was the client and principal contractor whilst P C Richardson & Co. (Middlesbrough) Ltd  as the decommissioning and demolition sub-contractor.

Offshore risks can not be ignored

Shell UK Limited and Amec Group Limited have been fined £150,000  and ordered to pay £41,500 in costs each   Shell UK Limited pleaded guilty to breaching s3 HSWA and Amec Group Limited pleaded guilty to breaching s2 HSWA.

On 11 November 2005, Mr David Soanes from Lowestoft was removing stair treads on the Sole Pit Clipper offshore gas installation, situated in the southern North Sea off the Norfolk coast. He fell about 5m to the landing below through the space created by removing two treads and suffered severe head and leg injuries.

Mr Soanes was employed by Amec Group Limited, who provided staff and services for Shell UK Limited, who operated the Clipper installation.

HSE Principal Inspector, Dr David Perry said:
"This incident resulted from Shell and Amec failing to manage well known and readily foreseeable hazards, in particular falling from height. Had the companies carried out adequate risk assessments and implemented and supervised the necessary control measures, including the use of a fall arrest harness, this accident could have been avoided. HSE will not hesitate to take action against those who fall short of the law in such a way."

Death at work

The Scotts Company (UK) Ltd of Godalming, Surrey, has been fined £80,000 and ordered to pay costs of £19,962 by Sheffield Crown Court after pleading guilty at an earlier hearing to a breach of s2(1) HSWA. The prosecution follows an unwitnessed incident at the company's premises at Stainforth Moor Peat Works, Thorne near Doncaster on 2 March 2006.

An experienced baler operator was fatally injured after becoming trapped by hydraulic equipment within an area used for baling when he apparently entered the enclosure and inadvertently activated a sensor, which started up the machinery.

HSE inspector Richard Noble said:
"This was a tragic incident which could have been avoided if the baler enclosure had been properly secured to prevent access. Employers have a duty of care to their employees and it is not good enough at any time to rely on temporary or makeshift arrangements in the hope that these will be adequate for safe working. When any repair work or new installation is undertaken risk assessments must be updated and appropriate measures taken to ensure the safety of employees."

Ed – It is deeply regrettable that a death occurs within the work place, especially when it could have been avoided if proper assessments had been carried out.

Training Vital

Natures Way Foods Ltd of Vinnetrow Road, Chichester, has been fined £30,000 and ordered to pay costs of £16,282 after earlier pleading guilty to contravening reg3(1) MHSWR and reg11(1) PUWER.

The company was prosecuted over an incident at its Chichester factory on 27 July, 2007, when a thorough cleaning of the production lines in the factory was being carried out. A Polish employee was asked to leave her regular duties to help with the cleaning, but was only given brief instructions on how to clean the machine, with which she was unfamiliar. As a result, her hand was drawn into the machine and one of her fingers was cut off.

HSE inspector David Swaite said:
"This prosecution highlights both the importance of having properly guarded machines and the need to ensure employees are given appropriate training. In this case the combination of the ability to access dangerous parts of the machine, and the lack of training and information given to the employee, caused a preventable accident. Machinery should be effectively guarded so that employees cannot gain access to dangerous parts. If the duty holder had made a suitable risk assessment, they should have identified that it was possible to gain access to a dangerous part of the machine and then taken appropriate control measures.

In addition, employees should be given sufficient information and training to ensure they are fully aware of the risks they face whilst at work and how they should safely use work equipment."

Ed - Regulation 11(1) PUWER states:
"Every employer shall ensure that measures are taken in accordance with paragraph (2) which are effective -
(a) to prevent access to any dangerous part of machinery or to any rotating stock-bar; or
(b) to stop the movement of any dangerous part of machinery or rotating stock-bar before any part of a person enters a danger zone."

Regulation 3(1) MHSWR states:
 "Every employer shall make a suitable and sufficient assessment of -
(a) the risks to the health and safety of his employees to which they are exposed whilst they are at work; and
(b) the risks to the health and safety of persons not in his employment arising out of or in connection with the conduct by him of his undertaking.

Shop fitters Failure

E&F Joinery of Hailsham, East Sussex, has been fined £20,000 and ordered to pay costs of £11,895 after pleading guilty at the Old Bailey, (Central Criminal Courts), to breaching regs 4(1) (a), 8(a) and 12(2) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005.

The prosecution followed an incident that took place during the fitting of a shop as part of the construction of Enfield Shopping Centre. The injured person was working from a mobile tower scaffold while fitting ductwork for a shop when he fell 3m onto a concrete floor. He suffered serious head injuries, which consequently lead to deteriorating physical and mental health.

The HSE inspection showed that while the injured person was not working directly for E&F Joinery, they were in control of the work and for planning and supervising it. It also showed that the tower scaffold did not have the correct edge protection on it, and it was also not inspected before use. Both of these measures would have helped prevent the injured person from falling.

Helen Donnelly, HSE Inspector said:
"This incident resulted in the injury of a worker, which should never have been able to happen. Falls from height remain the most common kind of accident resulting in severe injuries. Companies involved in refurbishment, building or maintenance should ensure that the work is planned properly and sensible measures taken so that workers are not exposed to risk. This case graphically illustrates that work should be planned, and that scaffolding should be checked to have the adequate edge protection."

Ed – Regulation 4(1) (a) Work at Height Regulations 2005 states that:
 "Every employer shall ensure that work at height is - (a) properly planned". Regulation 8(a) Work at Height Regulations 2005 states that:
"work should comply with the schedule outlining edge protection".

Regulation 12(2) Work at Height Regulations 2005 states that:
 "scaffolding towers should be inspected before use".

Skip

Peter David Marquis of Bryers Farm, Lea Lane, Lea, Preston has been fined £15,000 and ordered to pay £4,631.60 in costs by Preston Magistrates Court after pleading guilty to breaching s2 HSWA.

The court heard that the incident happened on 21 December 2007 at Mr Marquis' waste transfer station at Railway Sidings, Kirkham, Lancashire. Employees were carrying out a process called 'totting' - sorting out recyclable materials from skips. They were working on the floor of the transfer station while the excavator and a loading shovel worked close by. The excavator tracked back and crushed the teenager, breaking his femur and pelvis and causing serious internal abdominal injuries.

HSE Inspector Stephen Garsed said:
"While nothing can make up for the appalling life-changing injuries suffered by the teenager, Mr Marquis has accepted full responsibility for the incident from the outset and has not attempted to blame others.  This incident occurred because Mr Marquis and his staff did not see the risk of people working close to machines.

Risk assessments must be based on the best available information. There is ample advice on the HSE website about health and safety in the waste industry. It is now so easy to find that there can be no excuse for not knowing the standards to meet or for not making sure that risk assessments and operating procedures follow best practice."

Fatal Incident at Height

Pervez Mohammed Iqbal, has been fined £15,000 and ordered to pay £2,800 costs by Wolverhampton Crown Court after earlier pleading guilty to breaching s2(1) HSWA. This case followed a Police and HSE joint investigation into a fatal incident on 20 April 2007.

The court heard that, on that day, Mr Satnam Singh, 62, fell 5-6m through a fragile roof light whilst preparing to undertake work on the roof of a textiles factory in Smethwick. Work had already been undertaken to replace plastic roof lights following a burglary at the site and further work was being undertaken by Kundi Electrical to repair recurring roof leaks. Mr Singh was working under the direction of Pervez Mohammed Iqbal who was carrying out the work for Kundi Electrical.

In undertaking this roofing work, equipment and building materials were being carried across roofs, which are well known in roofing and building industries to be fragile, when Mr Singh fell through and died later in hospital from the injuries sustained.

The roof of the textiles factory was being accessed up a ladder and across several different types of pitched roofs of several factory units and an adjacent engineering company, below which employees were working.

At an earlier hearing, Surjit Singh Kundi trading as Kundi Electrical, Oldbury, had been ordered, by West Bromwich Magistrates, to pay £25,000 in fines, with £2,301 costs after pleading guilty to breaching HSWA. This case followed the same investigation into the fatal incident on 20 April 2007.

HSE Inspector Georgina Speake said:
"The roofs which were being repaired and those being used for access were totally unprotected, exposing anyone crossing them to the most serious risks. Iqbal had failed to undertake a suitable and sufficient risk assessment to identify the risks associated with the work being undertaken. Findings should have been passed on to employees so that they were aware of the hazards and then measures needed to minimise the risks put in place. The risk was wholly predictable, therefore avoidable. Such falls remain one of the biggest killers in the construction industry and last year, across the country, 45 people died after falling while working at height. Many incidents can be avoided if employers identify a safe way of tackling a job, provide all necessary protective equipment and ensure that workers or casual employees are fully trained and properly supervised. In this instance there were a number of optional methods and routes of access which would have greatly reduced the risk. Precautions that need to be taken to prevent falls are often simple and there is free guidance readily available to help employers take the right action."

Falling from a height

Demolition Dismantling Services Ltd of Tarran Way South, Moreton, Wirral, has been fined £3,350 and ordered to pay £3,000 costs after pleading guilty at Wirral Magistrates Court to an offence under s3(1) HSWA.

On 19 June 2007 a labourer, who was not a direct employee of the Demolition Dismantling Services Ltd, was removing a working platform from a roof at Anderton Concrete Products in Tarran Way South, Moreton, Wirral. He stepped onto the roof and fell 5m onto the concrete floor suffering serious leg and pelvic injuries.

Demolition Dismantling Services Ltd had not provided suitable training, an adequate risk assessment for the work or suitable safety equipment to prevent a fall and only provided limited supervision to an untrained general labourer.

Health and safety Executive Inspector Christina Goddard said:
"The labourer was given a job for which he had absolutely no training, was working from an inadequate platform and there was no other form of fall protection. This was an avoidable incident which could have quite easily resulted in a man's death. The company's failings resulted in this man suffering serious injuries, which have resulted in ongoing disability and a reduced earning potential. Falls from height remain the most common type of workplace fatality. They are largely preventable by the adoption of suitable measures such as scaffolding, fall arrest and fall protection. Information, instruction, training and supervision are additional important control measures to reduce the likelihood of all accidents.

"Information on working safely at height is freely available on the HSE website - and the precautions needed in this instance have been known for years. There is no excuse for not having the correct equipment available and used."

Falling from the Roof

Berneslai Homes Ltd of Springfield Street, Barnsley, has been fined £2,000 and ordered to pay costs of £2,022 by Barnsley Magistrates Court after pleading guilty to breaching reg 4 (1) Work at Height Regulations 2005.

On the 20 January 2007 Paul Pickering an employee of Berneslai Homes, was carrying out emergency repair work on the roof of a council property at Darfield Road, Barnsley following strong gales in the area.

Inadequate planning and supervision meant that the work method adopted by Mr Pickering was unsafe, he fell approximately 5m and suffered three broken ribs and severe bruising.

After the hearing, HSE Inspector David Stewart said:
"This incident caused serious injuries but it could have easily been much worse. If the work had been planned properly, with correct supervision, it would never have happened. Falls from height are the most common type of fatal injury and caused 3409 major injuries in 2006/07. Work at height must always be properly planned, appropriately supervised and carried out in a safe manner. Berneslai Homes, failed to ensure that the risks involved in this work were adequately assessed and controlled."

Care home Tragedy

MacIntyre Care, Milton Keynes, has been fined £10,000 and ordered to pay costs of £2,476, by St Albans Magistrates' Court, after pleading guilty to breaching s3(1) HSWA.

On 26 February 2007, a resident of MacIntyre Care home on Crosby Close in St Albans, fell whilst being hoisted from a chair to his bed. It was necessary to use the hoist as the resident had profound physical disabilities. As a result of the fall the resident suffered fractures to one of his hip bones and his elbow - and later died of sepsis, with the coroner highlighting the fall as a contributing factor to his death. An inadequately trained employee was entrusted to hoist the resident and failed to attach the sling properly to the hoist.

HSE Inspector, Rubeena Surnam said:
"This was a needless death. I hope it demonstrates to care home employers that they need to take positive steps to identify the risks in their workplaces and manage them. Employers must be sure they adopt safe systems of work and care staff are trained in the use of equipment such as hoists and aware of the potential risks involved."

Landlords beware

Sajida Kausar Ali, of St Ives, has been fined £10,000 and has also been ordered to pay £4,000 in costs by Huntingdon Magistrates' Court after pleading guilty to breaching s3(1) HSWA.

On 28 August 2007 Mrs Ali, who is the landlady of a rented property on Sallowbush Road, Huntingdon, failed to comply with an Improvement Notice served on her requiring gas safety checks to be carried out. She was also charged with failure to maintain gas appliances and remove gas appliances from rooms used for sleeping.

Prior to this, checks were made at the home to ensure the tenants were not actually at risk. It was discovered that of ten defects found three were "immediately dangerous" and three were "at risk". These included two gas leaks and a very poorly maintained open-flued gas fire situated in a room used as sleeping accommodation - which for a lengthy period was used by a young married couple with a new baby.

HSE inspector Stephen Manley said:
"There are many myths about health and safety - carbon monoxide is not one of them. People needlessly die each year due to a lack of effective maintenance of gas appliances. Everybody should think about having annual checks especially those responsible for letting a property. Landlords must ensure gas appliances are maintained and annually tested to ensure that they are in a safe condition and working effectively. Mrs Ali had failed, despite requests by Huntingdonshire District Council housing officers and then the HSE, to arrange for the inspection of all the appliances in the home. There is a strict legal duty upon landlords, and the specific failure to comply with the Improvement Notice was a major aggravating factor in this case.

I urge all landlords to ensure they identify and implement their duties under both the Housing Act and the Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations - both to reduce risk to tenants and to avoid court action such as this"

More Gas Fitting Woes

Melvin Scholes, trading as Fieldhead Plumbing, has been fined a total of £1,300 and ordered to pay costs of £750 by Rotherham Magistrates Court after pleading guilty to breaching reg 3(3) and 3(7) Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998.

The HSE received a complaint in January 2007 about Mr Scholes from one of his customers. Then, in May 2007 the HSE became aware of other work done by Mr Scholes in Rotherham.

After the hearing, HSE Inspector Steven Kay said:
"It is important for gas installers to keep their competence assessments up to date and to register. Re-assessment is necessary to ensure installers have the necessary skills and by being registered they also keep up to date with current issues and practice. Illegal installers undercut the reputable ones and adherence to the Regulations ensures a level playing field and a degree of quality assurance for householders.

Those who try to cheat the system also cheat their customers. Gas safety regulation is there for a reason - to stop people being killed or poisoned by carbon monoxide due to unsafe work and unsafe appliances. HSE will not hesitate to prosecute individuals who carry out gas fitting work while unregistered."

Since 1998 gas installers need to sit an Accredited Certification Scheme (ACS) test every five years to be deemed competent and maintain their registration. Mr Scholes had previously been registered, but had allowed his registration to lapse.

Ed - Regulation 3(3) The Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations (GSIUR) states:
 "....no employer shall allow any of his employees to carry out any work in relation to a gas fitting or service pipework and no self-employed person shall carry out any such work, unless the employer or self-employed person, as the case may be, is a member of a class of persons approved for the time being by the Health and Safety Executive for the purposes of this paragraph.”

Regulation 3(7) GSIUR states: “no person shall falsely pretend to be a member of a class of persons required to be approved under paragraph (3) above.”

Asthma threats to Teachers

Stirling Council has been fined £5,000 by Stirling Sheriff Court after pleading guilty to breaching reg 6(1) 7(1) and 12(1) of the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH) Regulations 2002 (as amended).   This prosecution followed a member of the teaching staff being diagnosed with occupational asthma.

Despite concerns being raised by staff at Bannockburn High School and by their own Health and Safety advisers, Stirling Council consistently failed over a period of years to adequately assess and control the risks to staff from wood dust which is known to be a cause of occupational asthma and even cancer. The problem is caused by exposure to wood dust that is so fine it cannot normally be seen by the naked eye. The fine particles penetrate the body's normal defences and can cause permanent disability.

HSE Principal Inspector Cheryl Anthony said:
"Mr Shand's diagnosis of occupational asthma was entirely preventable. Taking simple steps, and installing suitable extraction, can control dust exposure, which in turn will protect workers provided it is used correctly and is adequately maintained.  Workers need to be suitably informed, instructed and trained, for example on the health hazards from exposure to wood dust, and in the proper use of the control measures necessary to protect their health.  In addition, workers exposed to wood dust should have simple health checks to identify any ill-health effects at an early stage, so that serious, irreversible ill-health can be avoided".

Ed –

Regulation 6(1) (a) COSHH states: "An employer shall not carry out work which is liable to expose any employees to any substances hazardous to health unless he has made a suitable and sufficient assessment of the risks created by that work to the health of those employees and of the steps that need to be taken to meet the requirements of these Regulations."

Regulation 7 (1) COSHH states: "Every employer shall ensure that the exposure of his employees to substances hazardous to health is either prevented or, where this is not reasonably practicable, adequately controlled."

Regulation 12 (1) COSHH "Every employer who undertakes work which is liable to expose an employee to a substance hazardous to health shall provide that employee with suitable and sufficient information, instruction and training."

For most people the idea of occupational asthma lurking in a school woodworking room would be ludicrous and indeed just the sort of thing that would bring many people to conclude that health and safety was being taken too far.  However it is cases like these, albeit rare cases that demonstrate the importance of taking appropriate precautions.

How many Education Authorities and School Governing bodies ensure that there is appropriate ventilation in their woodworking rooms?

Fingerless

Knauf UK GMBH of Sittingbourne, Kent  has been fined £4,000 and ordered to pay costs of £3,204 after pleading guilty at Sittingbourne Magistrates court for contravening the MHSWR and reg 11(1) PUWER.

On 18 December 2007, a group of Knauf's employees were required to clean the rollers on the plasterboard production machine. The guards were removed and the machinery turned on - the rollers were rotating at production speed. The fingers of one of the employees became trapped and as a result he sustained serious and long term injuries to his hand. The injuries caused by the incident have affected the victim's day-to-day life in doing the most basic tasks. The HSE investigation found that no suitable health and safety risk assessment had been carried out prior to the cleaning taking place.

HSE inspector Jan Combs said:
"This conviction is a result of the company not thinking through all elements of their work activity. This led to this major injury which has significantly affected the victim's life. If a proper health and safety risk assessment had been carried out and acted upon this incident could have been avoided. They ignored basic health and safety rules ".

Ed – it bears repetition -

Section 3(1)(a) Management Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 states:
"It shall be the duty of every employer to make a suitable and sufficient assessment of the risks to the health and safety at work of their employees."

Regulation 11(1)(a) Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 states:
"Every employer shall ensure that measures are taken in accordance with paragraph (2) which are effective (a) to prevent access to any dangerous part of machinery or to any rotating stock-bar."

Severed Finger

Napier Brown & Company Ltd, of Normanton Industrial Estate, Normanton, has been fined a total of £3,000 and ordered to pay costs of £2,446 by Wakefield Magistrates Court, after pleading guilty to breaching the reg 11(1) PUWER and reg 3(1) MHSWR  

The prosecution followed an incident on 5 March 2008 at the company's premises, involving a blockage on a packaging line. In an attempt to check what was causing the problem the injured person, an electrical engineer, placed his arm in an inspection opening. His index finger was sheared off below the first knuckle by a rotating valve, which should not have been accessible.

The company subsequently carried out remedial work to prevent recurrences, but their work did not meet the appropriate safety standard, which seeks to ensure that employers take effective measures to prevent access to any dangerous part of machinery. The HSE issued an Improvement Notice on 20 March 2008 to ensure further action was taken to prevent access.

HSE Inspector Geoff Fletcher said:
"The company failed to protect the health and safety of their workers. Dangerous parts of machinery should not be accessible, and this must include times when maintenance is being carried out. An assessment of the risks associated with this process should have indicated what the appropriate safeguarding methods should have been the correct safeguard procedures should be followed wherever possible. In this instance the company failed to ensure that a risk assessment was carried out for the maintenance activity and that the appropriate procedures were in place and so relied upon inadequate and informal systems. The injured person will now have to live with the consequences of these failures for the rest of his life. The HSE will not hesitate to prosecute employers who put their workers in danger."

Ed – I won’t re-quote the regulations here!  Its all very obvious stuff.

Roof Risks

Michael Stephenson of Horton Bank Top, Bradford has been fined £2,000 and ordered to pay costs of £1,500 by Halifax Magistrates Court, after pleading guilty to breaching reg 6(3) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005.

Calderbrook Estates of Ripponden, West Yorkshire was fined £2,500 and ordered to pay costs of £3,355 after pleading guilty to giving rise to Mr Stephenson’s breach through their act or default, by virtue of s36(1) HSWA.

The prosecution followed an incident on 31 October 2007 at Ladyship Mills, Old Lane, Halifax, where Michael Stephenson was engaged by the mill's owners, Calderbrook Estates, as a roofing contractor. Calderbrook Estates had partly organised the roof work with Michael Stephenson and failed to supervise and monitor the system of work that he had put in place.

Towards the end of the work, a subcontracted roofer working for Mr Stephenson, Francis Ancliffe, fell 4m from the roof and broke both his heels after a ladder he was using became detached from the roof ridge.

There had been problems with the systems of work since the start of the job, on 10 September 2007, exposing roofers to risk of serious injury by falling from height. Scaffolding and guard rails were not provided at all places they were required and the scaffolding was taken down before the work was completely finished. There was also a risk of falling through glass in the roof, and when the glass was removed, of falling through to the factory floor below. None of this was dealt with correctly.

HSE Inspector David Welsh said:
"This incident caused serious injuries, and could have been life-threatening. There were problems with this work from the start of the job, and none of them were dealt with in a suitable way. The incident need never have happened if the correct systems had been and planned and put in place. I hope other businesses can learn from this incident and appreciate the high risk involved with work at height on roofs. Injuries caused by falls from heights are the biggest cause of death at work in Great Britain. Work at height must always be properly planned, appropriately supervised and carried out in a safe manner."

Ed – s36 HSWA prosecutions are as rare as hen’s teeth as these offences could be prosecuted directly as a breach of s3(1) HSWA so -

Section 36(1) HSWA states:
"Where the commission by any person of an offence under any of the relevant statutory provisions is due to the act or default of some other person, that other person shall be guilty of the offence, and a person may be charged with and convicted of the offence by virtue of this subsection whether or not proceedings are taken against the first-mentioned person."

Regulation 6(3) Work at Height Regulations 2005 states:
"Where work is carried out at height, every employer shall take suitable and sufficient measures to prevent, so far as is reasonably practicable, any person falling a distance liable to cause personal injury".

Aerial Cable Collision

Nevis Range Development Co has been fined £2,000 after pleading guilty to breaching s3 (1) HSWA. Gondola Operator Kevin Byrne, an employee of the company, has been fined £1,000 for the incident after pleading guilty to breaching s7 (1) HSWA.

The accident happened on 13 July 2006 when a gondola cable car on the Nevis Range Gondola came off the haul / suspension rope and collided with the car in front before falling 9m to the ground.

The forward car then tilted towards the ground, ejecting one passenger, and causing the other to jump to the ground.

At the conclusion of the trial, HSE Inspector Douglas Conner commented that this was a complex investigation for HSE.
 "This was a serious incident which could easily have had fatal consequences. As it was, five people including one child were injured, due to the failure of the company and their employee to ensure that strict health and safety rules were being followed. Notwithstanding the individual operator failings, the procedures provided by the company to gondola operators following an emergency stop of the gondola induced by a 'grip gauge fault' were lacking.

"Good communication must be assured at critical times such as in emergency stop situations and this communication must be reliable and effective, in this instance it was lacking.  Latent failures in organisations such as poor communication and people's uncertainties about their roles or responsibilities can pose the same, or even greater potential danger to health and safety as active failures. In an operation like this, it is vital that aerial uplift operators have robust operating systems in place and that these are regularly reviewed."

Section 7 (1) HSWA states:
"It shall be the duty of every employee while at work to take reasonable care for the health and safety of himself and of other persons who may be affected by his acts or omissions at work."

Elderly Dangers

A court case has highlighted the need for workers to be aware of the dangers to elderly people after an 81-year-old woman fell through an open hatch in her home.

British Gas Services Ltd, Maidenhead Road, Windsor has been fined £2,000 and ordered to pay a compensation fee of £2,700 to the injured householder. Adrian Newth trading as Perthshire Oil Heating, 1 Forerow Cottage, Caputh was not fined but was ordered to pay £300 in compensation to the injured person. Both pleaded guilty to charges under s3(1) HSWA.

Mr Newth was installing an oil fired central heating system into the property. The installation was part of the Scottish Government Central Heating Programme and British Gas Services Ltd were contracted to manage the programme by Communities Scotland who took on this role in October 2006.

Mr Newth opened a hatch in the floor of the hallway during discussion about the installation with two electricians. The hatch was left open, unguarded and unprotected except for the closed living room door while Mr Newth and the electricians proceeded to carry out work in other areas of the property. The woman walked into the hallway to gain access to her front door and fell into the open hatch. She sustained major injuries to her right upper arm and severe bruising and contusions to her back and legs.

HSE principal inspector Jim Skilling said:
"This is one of four very serious incidents that my Inspectors have investigated in a 12-month period in the east of Scotland. All involved elderly women falling down hatches or holes left exposed and unprotected where a contractor carried out plumbing, heating or gas replacement work in their properties. It is not sensible or acceptable for contractors to assume that simply telling the occupant to remain in one room is sufficient. Contractors must take positive steps to prevent any incident by implementing a safe system of work approach where all holes are covered or have barriers to ensure the safety of all persons whether occupants or visitors. This was a wholly preventable incident, which has greatly affected the householder, and it could very well have proved fatal."

Help the Aged recently produced evidence to show that falls are the leading cause of death for over 75 year-olds.

Every year in Scotland, thousands of projects involving central heating installation and upgrading are carried out. This together with other small contracts inside elderly persons' properties means there is considerable scope for this type of incident to happen again if contractors do not take positive action on every occasion.  Two similar cases recently resulted in fines of £3,300 and £5,000 being imposed on two firms elsewhere in Scotland.

Serious Burning

Phoenix Autoparts 2000 Ltd, of Derby Road, Stapleford, Nottingham, has been fined £2,000 and ordered to pay £2,375 costs, by Nottingham Magistrates' Court after pleading guilty to breaching reg 6(3) Dangerous Substances and Explosive Atmospheres Regulations 2002 for failure to apply measures to control risks from a dangerous substance and reg 5(1) of the same regulations for failing to make suitable and sufficient assessment of the risks to employees arising from the presence of a dangerous substance.

On 25 August 2006, a 59-year-old employee received severe burns when a leak of petrol was ignited. The leak occurred during an operation to transfer petrol from a fuel retriever tank into a vehicle's petrol tank. The employee saw what was happening and walked through the puddle of petrol that had formed under the retriever unit to stop the leak. As he did so, the petrol was ignited, probably from a stray spark from an oxyacetylene torch being used nearby, and he was engulfed in flames.

The man's trousers were set alight and he suffered severe burns to the backs of his legs and to his hands and arms as he was trying to rip his trousers off. He ran to a nearby tap to put out the flames. The man was admitted to hospital for five weeks and had to have two skin grafts. His burns covered 17 per cent of his body and he has not returned to work since.

HSE Inspector for Nottinghamshire Maureen Kingman said:
"This was a traumatic incident for the employee, and the company's management were shocked by what happened. Nevertheless, this incident highlights the need for companies dealing with hazardous substances such as petrol to ensure they control all the risks associated with that substance."

The District Judge commented that the company was negligent in that it had failed to see what was a serious and obvious risk. When the flammable liquid ignited a long standing employee suffered serious injuries. He said that the fine would have been higher, but due to financial difficulties the Court had to take into account their ability to pay.

Ed - Regulation 5 (1) Dangerous Substances and Explosive Atmospheres Regulations 2002 states:
 "Where a dangerous substance is or is liable to be present at the workplace, the employer shall make a suitable and sufficient assessment of the risks to his employees which arise from that substance."

Regulation 6 (3) of the Dangerous Substances and Explosive Atmospheres Regulations 2002 states:
"Where it is not reasonably practicable to eliminate risk pursuant to paragraphs (1) and (2), the employer shall, so far as is reasonably practicable, apply measures consistent with the risk assessment and appropriate to the nature of the activity or operation
(a) to control risks, including the measures specified in paragraph (4); and
(b) to mitigate the detrimental effects of a fire or explosion or the other harmful physical effects arising from dangerous substances

Early Learning

The HSE are seeking to raise awareness of work related risks – especially asbestos related in those new to the work force.

Mike Ford an HM Inspector of Health & Safety is part of that campaign and has delivered a hard-hitting message to 500 student plumbers, electricians, carpenters, bricklayer, finishers, tilers, designers and painters studying, at South Birmingham College, to work in the construction industry about the risks of asbestos and the health impact it can have.

Sufferers from mesothelioma this deadly form of cancer have almost exclusively been previously exposed to asbestos and recent research conducted by the HSE shows that younger tradesmen, such as plumbers and electricians, know that asbestos is dangerous but just don't believe that they are personally at risk. Yet every week 20 tradesmen across the country die simply because they have breathed in asbestos fibres during the course of their work whilst, across the West Midlands region one person dies a painful death every three days from mesothelioma.

Mike Ford said:
"Young tradesmen and women do not understand that the risks of asbestos are real, they think it's yesterday's problem but the reality is that here in Great Britain we are in the midst of an epidemic. Numbers of deaths are likely to soon exceed 5,000 a year. Asbestos is still present in about half a million buildings and when disturbed by tradesmen there is a real risk of inhalation which may cause their early and painful death."

Margaret Watkinson from South Birmingham College, said:
"Asbestos is a very real danger for workers in the construction industry. South Birmingham College was delighted that HSE gave our construction centre students a valuable insight into the realities and dangers of working with asbestos and the steps that they can take to protect themselves."

HSE's "Asbestos: The Hidden Killer" campaign features posters and radio adverts designed to encourage tradesmen to get a free asbestos information pack by calling 0845 345 0055 or by visiting http://www.hse.gov.uk/hiddenkiller for further information. The free information pack provides information on the dangers of asbestos, highlighting where asbestos-containing materials may be present in buildings, what they look like, how they should be dealt with and where to find training.