Welcome to HSE prosecutions in brief. A selection of this weeks prosecutions by the HSE.
 |
| [relatedPosts title=”Related Posts”] |
|
|
Berkshire contractor prosecuted for guard rail failure
A building firm has been prosecuted for safety failings after a decorator was seriously injured when he fell through a substandard guard rail at a housing development in Reading.
Phillip Williams, 63, from Reading, fractured his hip, broke five ribs, chipped a bone in his spine and was left with internal bleeding and clotting around his lungs as a result of the fall during the construction of a house at Wintringham Way on 30 August last year.
Reading Magistrates’ Court heard (8 June) that he had been sub-contracted to work at the property by the main contractor W Pocock and Sons Limited, a local family-run business.
Mr Williams was walking towards a first floor light-well to talk to workers on the ground floor. As he leant in against a wooden guard rail it gave way and he fell approximately 2.6 metres to the ground floor below.
He was hospitalised for three weeks as a result of his injuries, and needed three months of recuperation before gradually returning to work.
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) investigated and found the guard rail in the light well had been removed and replaced prior to the incident in order to pass materials from the ground floor to the first. This seemingly caused the fixings to deteriorate, therefore making the guard rail inadequate to prevent a person from falling – a direct failing on behalf of the contractor.
W Pocock and Sons, of New Lane Hill, Tilehurst, pleaded guilty to a single breach of the Work at Height Regulations 2005 in relation to the incident. The company was fined £5,000 and ordered to pay £2,706 in costs.
Photo and comments from the HSE through the link.
British Standards that outline the requirements for working at height are available here.
Bristol machining company fined after employee suffers serious injuries
A Brislington-based machining company has been prosecuted for failing to adequately guard dangerous parts of machinery resulting in a worker suffering serious head and chest injuries.
Bristol Magistrates Court heard today (11 June) that 34 year old Ian Spicer, from Hartcliffe in Bristol, was operating a Computer Numerically Controlled (CNC) lathe machine at Mil Tu Fit Engineering Ltd when the incident happened on 30 August 2011.
During an investigation, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) discovered that the company had two CNC lathes on site, one intended for machining short parts only and another with a bar feed attachment and guard designed for machining longer parts. Because the machine for longer parts was already in use, Mr Spicer was instructed to use the lathe without the bar feed attachment to machine long metal bars at roughly 2.5 metres in length.
The court was told that, Mr Spicer was advised to place a barrier of empty drums at the end of the machine in order to fence off the rotating bar from passers-by – a method that Mil Tu Fit Engineering had used in the past. However, as the machine was operating, the bar became unstable and began to bend under its own weight. As Mr Spicer turned to see what was happening, he was struck by the bar which threw him to the ground and knocked him unconscious.
Mr Spicer sustained a compressed skull fracture, which had partly shattered and concaved his skull, leaving fragments resting on his brain. He also suffered wide gashes to his chest, a dislodged breast plate, broken wrist, and several other smaller wounds on his body.
Mil Tu Fit Engineering Ltd, of 246 Broomhill Road, Brislington, Bristol, BS4 5RG, was found guilty of breaching Regulation 11(1)(a) of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998. The company was fined a total of £10,000 and ordered to pay £3,632 in costs.
Comments from the HSE through the link.
Workers were needlessly exposed to deadly asbestos dust
Workmen carrying out a refurbishment at a Devon pub were exposed to deadly asbestos dust and then asked by their site manager to remove it without adequate protection.
The incident happened at the Three Crowns pub in Chagford, Dartmoor in January 2010, when the refurbishment was being carried out for St Austell Breweries by Cowley’s Building and Maintenance Ltd and its director, Christopher Reed.
Exeter Magistrates fined St Austell Breweries £5,000 and ordered them to pay £6,295 in costs in a prosecution brought by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE). Cowley’s Building and Maintenance Ltd were fined £12,500 with £6,295 costs and Christopher Reed was fined £2,500 with costs of £2,000.
The court heard that the work took place without a suitable asbestos survey report which should have been provided by St Austell Breweries.
As the workmen, all employees of Cowley’s, began removal of an internal wall they uncovered asbestos insulation boards inside. Reed, who was in charge of the site, arranged for a sample of the board to be tested by asbestos specialists but also asked the workers to pick-up the debris from the boards.
During the demolition of the wall and the clean-up, there was further disturbance and exposure of asbestos on the site.
St Austell Brewery Company Ltd of Trevarthian Road, St Austell pleaded guilty to a breach of Regulation 4(3) of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2006 and was fined £5,000.
Cowley’s Building and Maintenance Ltd of Queen Street, Colyton pleaded guilty to a breach of Regulation 6(1)(a) of the same regulations and was fined £5,000. The company also pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 11(1)(a) and was fined £7,500.
Christopher Reed, of Higher Holcombe Road, Teignmouth, pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 11 of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2006 and was fined £2,500.
Comments from the HSE through the link.
The latest Asbestos British Standards can be found here.
Sussex company director fined after failing to control asbestos
An estate management director, from Brighton, has been fined after failing to manage the spread of asbestos during the demolition of a building.
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) prosecuted Brian Marshall, 44, managing director of Supply on Demand Ltd, for breaching asbestos safety regulations.
Brighton Magistrates’ Court heard yesterday (11 June) that between the 7 and 20 May 2011, Mr Marshall instructed a worker to dismantle a building at Bluebell Business Estate, Uckfield, with an excavator. No asbestos survey was carried out before work started and asbestos containing materials (ACMs) were disturbed during the demolition.
A HSE investigation found that Mr Marshall was told about his duty to manage asbestos by Lewes District council in September 2008. He even obtained a quote in February 2011 for an asbestos refurbishment survey on another project nearby.
After the hearing, HSE’s Inspector Russell Beckett said:
“Asbestos can be difficult to identify unless you are trained and competent to do so. Before any demolition or dismantling work starts, an assessment must be carried out to establish whether asbestos is present. A survey will tell you whether asbestos is present and what to do about it.
“Mr Marshall was well aware of the need to carry out an asbestos survey but decided to carry on without one. This is a shocking case of a director who did know better simply ignoring the law.
“Up to 4,000 people a year die from asbestos related diseases. HSE will not hesitate to prosecute those like Mr Marshall who flout the law.”
Brian Marshall, of Rock Grove, Brighton, Sussex, pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 4(3) of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2006. He was fined £8,000 and ordered to pay costs of £10,449.
The latest Asbestos British Standards can be found here.
West Yorkshire company failed to safeguard workers
A West Yorkshire engineering firm has been fined after a worker was badly injured when he became entangled in a rotating machine tool that caught him by the neck.
Mr Tomas Cisarik, 33, suffered a deep gash running 20cms long and 8cms wide on his back, a cracked foot bone and severe friction burns from his neck, down his left arm to his wrist. His clothes were literally ripped from his back.
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) today (13 June) prosecuted P. Craven Engineering Co. Ltd., of Batley, for serious safety failings after investigating the incident at their Heckmondwike factory on 7 September 2011.
Huddersfield Magistrates’ Court was told that Mr Cisarik, from Dewsbury, had pre-programmed one of the firm’s CNC machines for a short warm-up cycle where the machine tool would rotate at around 300rpm.
He returned later and went inside to clean up the metal shavings. As he entered the machine, he felt a pull on his neck and his clothes were ripped from the top half of his body. A colleague heard a loud bang and Mr Cisarik’s screaming and saw he had been pulled into the machine and was trying to climb out of a side door.
The court was told that if the safety interlocks had been working, the machine would have stopped as Mr Cisarik entered the machine. Instead the safety interlocks had been intentionally disabled as the key had been placed into the main switch on an opposite door. This wrongly signalled that the machine door was closed, but in fact allowed it to run with the doors open, giving unguarded access to dangerous machinery.
Following the incident, HSE served four Prohibition Notices on the company preventing further use of the CNC and three other machines because of inadequate guarding of dangerous equipment. Interlock switches on two other CNC machines were found to be broken.
After the hearing, HSE Inspector Andrea Jones, said:
“This horrific incident was entirely preventable. P. Craven Engineering Ltd failed to put vital, but very straightforward, measures in place to protect its workforce. The machine should been provided with working interlocked guards that stop the movement of dangerous parts when opened.
“Tomas Cisarik was very lucky not to be paralysed or killed. He was able to return to work for a different company after three months. He was still in constant pain and couldn’t bend his back. Fortunately he has now nearly fully recovered.
“The very real dangers associated with CNC machines include entanglement with rotating parts, contact with sharp tools, crushing, and injury by ejected components. These risks are well known in the industry and the safeguards are very well established.”
P. Craven Engineering Co Ltd of Woodlands Road, Batley, admitted contravening the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 at the factory in Walkley Lane, Heckmondwike. They were fined £5,000 and ordered to pay £2,302 in costs.
Timber repair firm responsible for spread of asbestos fibres in shop
Potentially deadly asbestos fibres were spread in part of a shop by unqualified workmen and left on the premises for three weeks.
In a prosecution by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), Cardiff Magistrates today heard that Timberwise (UK) Ltd, a national company specialising in damp and timber repairs, committed four offences and was fined a total of £18,000 and ordered to pay £5,314 in costs.
The court was told that Timberwise was contracted to carry out the work in an antiques shop at in High Street, Cowbridge in the Vale of Glamorgan in July, 2011.
Timberwise sent employees to work on the site to survey and strip out parts of the building affected by damp and wood rot, without checking for the presence of asbestos.
None of the workers had received sufficient information, instruction or training in asbestos awareness or removal and Timberwise did not have a license to remove or handle asbestos containing materials.
Asbestos insulation boards were removed in a back room by one of the workers and the ceiling was demolished. The uncontrolled removal of the asbestos boards and demolition work caused the disturbance and spread of potentially deadly asbestos fibres.
Instead of arranging for the proper disposal of the asbestos, the dust was swept into rubble bags and dumped in a skip lorry, along with the asbestos insulation boards. The asbestos material was immediately identified at the waste transfer site and were collected by Timberwise and left in the backyard of the shop.
The owners of the building contacted the HSE and then arranged for a licensed removal company to undertake a full environmental clean of the building.
HSE Inspector, Steve Richardson, speaking after the case, said: “This incident was entirely preventable and would not have happened if Timberwise had provided adequate information, instruction and training to its staff.
“The company had no procedures to check for the presence of asbestos and as a result, has put the health of its workers and the shopowners at risk of potentially fatal asbestos-related lung diseases.”
Timberwise (UK) Ltd, of Drake Mews, Gadbrook Park, Rudheath, Cheshire, pleaded guilty to four offences under the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2006 and was fined the following amounts:
– Section 5 (duty to identify the presence of asbestos) £4,500
– Section 8 (work with a licensed asbestos material) £4,500
– Section 10 (duty to provide information, instruction and training) £4,500
– Section 16 (duty to prevent of reduce the spread of asbestos) £4,500
The latest Asbestos British Standards can be found here.
Building firm sentenced after worker breaks back in fall
A building firm has been sentenced after a bricklayer broke his back when he fell through exposed floor joists at a site in Widnes.
The 40-year-old man from Southport, who has asked not to be named, was working on a project to refurbish a corner shop and construct four one-bedroom houses when he fell three metres from the first to the ground floor.
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) prosecuted the principal contractor for the project, Frank Rogers (Building Contractor) Ltd, following an investigation into the incident at Albert Road in Widnes on 3 May 2011.
Warrington Magistrates’ Court heard that there was no internal staircase in the building, so workers had to climb up a ladder or through a window opening from scaffolding to access the first floor.
The bricklayer tripped as he stepped from the window onto a trestle on the floor, and fell between the exposed joists. He suffered a brief loss of consciousness and a broken back.
Frank Rogers (Building Contractors) Ltd pleaded guilty to a breach of the Work at Height Regulations 2005 by failing to make sure that sufficient measures were in place to prevent workers being injured in a fall.
The company, of Lark Hill Lane in Liverpool, was fined £13,500 and ordered to pay £7,509 in prosecution costs on 13 June 2012.
Comments from the HSE through the link.
Firm fined after worker hurt in trench collapse
A former England kick boxer has had to give up the sport after being injured at work, a court was told.
Nottinghamshire engineering company Phil Watson Civil Engineering Limited was today fined for the incident which saw 36-year-old Zak Davis, of Billinghay, Lincolnshire, buried up to his waist when a trench collapsed.
Mr Davis was working on a small housing development just off Wragby Road, Bardney, Lincolnshire when the incident happened on 4 August 2011.
He was laying drain pipes in a trench being dug by an excavator. It had been raining heavily during the day. While he was in the trench the digger operator noticed the walls beginning to crack and shouted a warning but before Mr Davis could escape he was hit by the falling material, including a large lump of concrete, and was pinned down by his legs.
He dislocated and fractured his hip socket and shattered his pelvis. He needed 10 hours of surgery and is still off work.
An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive found Phil Watson Civil Engineering Ltd had failed to assess the ground conditions and the effect that the rain would have, and failed to install measures to prevent a trench collapse.
The company, of Victoria Street, Shirebrook, Mansfield, Nottinghamshire, pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 31(1) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007. Lincoln magistrates today fined the firm £10,000 and ordered it to pay full costs of £2,141.
Comments from the HSE through the link.
BS EN 474-10:2006+A1:2009 Earth-moving machinery. Safety. Requirements for trenchers
BS EN 13331-1:2002 Trench lining systems. Product specifications
Worker’s safety pleas ignored by South West London firm
A former Croydon construction company has been prosecuted after a worker fell eight metres from a scaffold tower that he hadn’t wanted to build for safety reasons.
Green Acre Homes (South East) Ltd, which ceased to operate a year ago, failed to listen to the concerns raised by handyman John Morgan, who had been instructed to build a tower scaffold on a building site in Peckham.
Mr Morgan, 44, of Roehampton, was finishing building the top of the tower on 25 November 2009 when a strong gust of wind sent it crashing to the ground. He plummeted some eight metres, fracturing his ribs and breastbone, compressing his vertebrae and wounding his head.
Westminster Magistrates’ Court was told (13 June) that an investigation into the incident by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) identified that Mr Morgan and a colleague were initially asked to erect the tower scaffold in an area that didn’t provide a stable base.
Despite protesting to site management they were told to continue. They improvised as best they could until a representative from Wandle Housing Association, the client company, saw it and ordered the tower to be taken down as it was unsafe to use
The court heard Mr Morgan was then told to build the tower in a second location. Again there was a space problem and again he and his co-worker raised concerns with managers about safety.
Once more Green Acre Homes failed to take any action and the workers went about building the scaffold tower. As it was nearing completion, Mr Morgan was at the top of the tower when high winds struck, sending the tower toppling to the ground.
Mr Morgan was unable to work for three months. He now suffers persistent ringing in his ears and permanent scarring.
Magistrates were told that HSE progressed the case on behalf of Mr Morgan despite the firm going into liquidation in August 2011 and because the prosecution sends vital messages to all industries about working safely at heights.
Green Acre Homes (South East) Ltd did not appear in court and were found guilty in their absence. Magistrates found the firm guilty of breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974. It was fined a £15,000 and ordered to pay costs of £6,969.
Comments from the HSe through the link.
British Standards that outline the requirements for working at height are available here.
Firm fined after worker falls from roof
A Leicester construction company has been fined for safety failings after a 19-year-old worker was hurt falling from a roof.
Apprentice joiner Jonathan Hill was working on a housing development in Croft Road, Cosby, fitting wooden batons between roof trusses when he slipped and fell around two and a half metres, landing on first floor boarding.
Mr Hill, of Broughton Astley, suffered a fractured vertebra in the incident on 9 November 2011 and was off work for two months.
An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive found principal contractor Stokes Evans Developments Limited had installed fall mitigation in the form of air bags on the first floor when the roof trusses were initially installed a week before the incident. However, they were removed before the trusses and supporting batons were fully fixed in place and no alternative safety measures were put in place
The company, of St Peter’s Road, Arnesby, pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 22(1)(a) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007 for not doing enough to prevent the fall. Leicester magistrates today fined the firm £500 and ordered it to pay costs of £850.
After the hearing HSE Inspector Tony Mitchell said:
The company, of Victoria Street, Shirebrook, Mansfield, Nottinghamshire, pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 31(1) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007. Lincoln magistrates today fined the firm £10,000 and ordered it to pay full costs of £2,141.
After the hearing HSE Inspector Tony Mitchell said:
“This incident could have been prevented simply by leaving the air bags in place until the work was complete, rather than removing them and putting them back in storage.
“Installing roofs is a high risk activity and builders should not become complacent about ensuring that fall protection, in whatever form, is provided throughout the work.
“Although the immediate cause of this incident was the lack of fall protection, there is also an underlying cause – Stokes Evans Developments Limited failed to adequately monitor and control work in line with risk assessments and method statements.”
British Standards that outline the requirements for working at height are available here.
Asbestos removal firm fined for putting workers at risk
A licensed asbestos removal contractor has been fined for putting its workers at risk of exposure to the dangerous substance during a refurbishment project in Warwickshire.
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) prosecuted AG&M Ltd for failing to properly maintain a decontamination unit and respiratory masks, and for failing to have a trained supervisor on site at a building in Station Road, Kenilworth.
Nuneaton Magistrates’ Court heard that an inspector from HSE visited the site on 20 January 2011 and found the unit, which was essential to allow workers to clean themselves thoroughly after removing asbestos from the building, was substandard.
Of most concern was that the shower could not be used because the water in the hosepipe which supplied it had frozen.
Daily inspection records of the unit had not been completed so the company had also failed to identify a damaged vent, a broken door hinge and the shower compartment door not closing properly.
The court heard that two men, who were removing ceiling tiles containing amosite, or brown asbestos, from the building when the inspector visited, would not have realised there was no water supply until they were in the shower compartment.
They would not have been able to clean themselves until the water in the pipe had defrosted, which would have increased the risk of exposure and spread of asbestos.
AG&M Ltd, of Stocks Hill, Ecclesfield, Sheffield, was today found guilty of breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 and was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay £5,349 costs.
Comments from the HSE through the link.
Firms fined over university death
A carpenter died when a large slab of concrete fell on him during construction of a new accommodation block at Bath University.
Philip Hames, of Weston-super-Mare, was working for Creagh Concrete Products on the University’s Claverton Down Campus when he adjusted a metal prop without realising it was securing a concrete plank above him.
The concrete plank dropped onto Mr Hames, killing him instantly and narrowly missing a co-worker. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) investigated the 1 November 2007 incident and has now brought a prosecution against Creagh.
Creagh Concrete Products Ltd of Blackpark Road, Toomebridge, County Antrim was found guilty of a breach of Section 3 (1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 and was fined £100,000 and costs of £140,000 at Bristol Crown Court.
The court was told the positions and type of props used in supporting the concrete plank were critical, however placement was largely left to the workers to decide. One end of the concrete plank rested on an asymmetric steel beam on a movement joint.
The court heard the designs produced by Creagh Concrete Products Ltd failed to communicate to workers the nature of the expansion joint. In adjusting the prop, Mr Hames inadvertently destabilised the asymmetric beam the plank was resting on.
The propping of a structure under construction is called the ‘temporary works’.
Established British Standard and industry guidance was available to assist construction companies to plan work.
After the case, HSE Inspector Ian Smart, said:
“Unfortunately there has been a rise in the number of fatalities caused by the collapse of structures under construction or refurbishment over the past few years.
“Mr Hames was an experienced carpenter but Creagh failed to recognise the scope of the work he was undertaking and failed to ensure he was made aware of how critical the placements of the props were and the fact they should not be adjusted.
“Therefore, Mr Hames would not have understood the outcome of his actions. It was foreseeable he and other workers on site would seek to move props and robust steps should have been taken to prevent this.
“Since this incident, the published standard for temporary works has been revised. It provides additional clarity on respect of the safeguards associated with the temporary support of structures. It is crucial that this guidance is followed by the construction industry.”
