Who

Willowbrook Property Services Ltd

When

30 Jan 2007

Where

South East Hampshire Magistrates Court

Why

This prosecution followed an investigation by the Health & Safety Executive into an accident that occurred on 23rd November 2004. When Lance Smith, a labourer, was injured while assisting a colleague with picking up a one tonne of ballast from the rear of a tipper truck using an excavator.  Mr Smith's colleague, Jamie Collier-Baker who drove the excavator, attempted to manoeuvre the bucket over the bag. The bucket swung unexpectedly and hit Mr Smith, trapping his leg against the side of the truck he had been standing on, forcing him over the side and onto the ground. His left leg was later amputated at the knee as a result of his crushing injuries.  The investigation found that Mr Collier-Baker was not qualified to drive heavy plant, including an excavator of this type. He had not attended a Construction Industry Training Board training course, and was not sufficiently skilled to be regarded as a plant operator.  Willowbrook Property Services Ltd failed to ensure that construction plant was operated in a safe manner and by a trained driver on their site.  Willowbrook Property Services Ltd, based at Osborne Road, Portsmouth, pleaded guilty of breaching Regulations 4(2) and 17(3) a of the Construction (Health and Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1996.  Self-employed Jamie Collier-Baker, based at Magdalen Road, Portsmouth pleaded guilty of Regulations 4(1) and 17(3) (a) of the Construction (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1996.  Self-employed construction site labourer Jamie Collier-Baker was also fine £350 for operating an excavator in the same incident.   Charles Gilby HM Principal Inspector of Health and Safety, said:  "Construction plant and machinery is obviously potentially dangerous. Even a small excavator, let alone a 7 tonne machine, can easily kill in the wrong hands. This is why it is essential that skilled competent operators, whose skills have been verified through formal training and assessment, only ever operate it. Lance Smith faces the rest of his life seriously disabled as a direct result of others incompetence.  Willowbrook Property Services Ltd's owners and management, and Jamie Collier-Baker will probably never repeat this mistake, but we hope this case will act to warn others of these risks, and prevent repartitions of this horrific accident elsewhere."

How Much?

£4,000 plus costs

Who

Oldham Council

When

30 Jan 2007

Where

Trafford Magistrates Court

Why

Oldham MBC has been fined £12,000 and ordered to pay £4,884 costs at Trafford Magistrates' Court after pleading guilty to a criminal charge brought by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) after employee Steven Walsh suffered lacerations to his hand from an unguarded circular saw blade.  Steven is employed as a technician in the design technology department at Counthill community school in Oldham.  The Council pleaded guilty to a charge under Section 2 of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 in that it failed to ensure so far as is reasonably practicable the health and safety of its employees, including Steven Walsh.  HSE Inspector Helen Fuller, who carried out HSE's investigation into the incident, said: "Steven Walsh's duties included cutting materials for pupils on equipment that they would not themselves be allowed to use and cleaning and maintaining work equipment including tools and benches.  At around 3.50 pm on 18 April 2005 he was asked by a pupil if he would cut some plywood sheets down as part of some GCSE project work and to perform this task Mr Walsh used a Wadkin Bursgreen circular saw.  Mr Walsh cut through the plywood with the saw and as he lent over to turn the saw off with his right hand his left hand came in to contact with the unguarded spinning blade causing the cuts to his first and second fingers on his left hand.  It was only at this point that Mr Walsh realised that the guard was missing.  Subsequent enquiries revealed that prior to Mr Walsh's accident the saw had been used by Peter Ludlam, a teacher at Counthill School. He had used the saw to cut a groove in a pupil's work piece and to do this had removed the crown guard and riving knife and adjusted the blade height.   After he had completed his task he had turned the saw off and returned to his class but had not replaced the guard or riving knife as it was close to the end of the school day.  Our investigation revealed that Steven Walsh had not received any training in the use and maintenance of woodworking machinery since he had joined the school in January 2004.  Peter Ludlam himself joined Counthill School in 1980 and although he had been trained as part of his teacher training he received no further training in his 25 years at Counthill School leading up to the accident.  The Council has since taken extensive health and safety measures, but all were reasonably practicable prior to Mr Walsh's accident and it is a shame he has suffered to bring the need for them to light".

How Much?

£12,000 plus costs

Who

Harron Homes (North West) Ltd

When

26 Jan 2007

Where

Huyton Magistrates Court

Why

The Company were prosecuted for an accident that occurred on 11 October 2004 at a Harron Homes site known as Park Meadow on County Road in Kirkby, Merseyside.  Four members of a bricklaying gang were injured when the first floor of the two-storey house in which they were working collapsed.  The floor was supported by joists that were fixed to one side of the building by metal joist hangers. Unfortunately the hangers had not been adequately built into the brickwork. This would not have been so dangerous had the floor been supported from below with props.  Without props or proper use of joist hangers, the weight of the men and large numbers of concrete blocks stacked there to be used in the building work overloaded the floor. The joist hangers had nor been installed as per manufacturers' instructions.  HSE brought the prosecution alleging that the company had failed to ensure the health and safety or persons not in its employment so far as is reasonably practicable when they were working on decked floors joist supported by metal joists hangers.  Robert Hodkinson, HM Inspector of Health and Safety who investigated the accident said: '"This is the third prosecution I have had to take in relation to the overloading of floors supported by joist hangers.   House builders and others who use joist hangers should make sure that they have carried out an adequate assessment of the risks associated with using joist hangers in the particular buildings they are working on.  A suitable and sufficient risk assessment, taking account of manufacturers instructions, should enable them to develop safe systems of work. Those working on construction sites of this type should be fully informed of the safe systems of work to follow.  It is fortunate that the four were men who were injured in the collapse suffered relatively minor injuries. However this incident could have easily resulted in one or more fatalities and the level of penalty set by the Magistrates reflects the potential seriousness of this accident.

How Much?

£18,000 plus costs

Who

Foildek Roofings Ltd

When

23 Jan 2007

Where

Manchester Crown Court

Why

The prosecution follows an accident to Foildek employee Lee Quinlan of Chadderton who sustained multiple injuries while working on a fragile roof at Leggett Freightways Ltd on Hammond Avenue, Reddish in Stockport on 7 May 2004 when he stepped on and fell approximately over seven metres through an asbestos cement corrugated roof panel onto the warehouse floor.  Mr Quinlan suffered two broken wrists, a broken right ankle, broken left elbow, and a fractured skull with bleeding on the brain. He also lost four teeth. Foildek had failed to ensure that a safe system of work was adopted for its work at the premises.  HSE Inspector Warren Pennington who carried out HSE's investigation of the incident, said:   "Plenty of guidance is available to the roofing industry. The risks associated with falls through fragile roofs are well known and documented. However in this case Foildek failed to have proper regard for the safety of men who were placed at risk and, as a result, when an accident occurred. Mr Quinlan was seriously injured.   Had he been provided with a safe system of work in the form of appropriate method statements with suitable and sufficient risk assessments and had these been enforced then the accident almost certainly would not have occurred.  The risks associated with working on fragile roofs are well known and guidance on how to do so is available from HSE."  Employees Lee and Christopher Quinlan, Ian Turner and William Jones were working on corrugated roofs constructed from asbestos corrugated roof sheets and transparent roof lights that should always be treated as fragile. No scaffold was used to gain safer access to the roof, nor was there any edge protection.  Mr Pennington continued: "Although Foildek had drawn up a method statement for the job in Stockport it was inadequate for a variety of reasons, including that:  although it identified risks with moving, lifting and handling materials it failed to provide a safe system for raising of replacement roof sheets from ground to roof. Lifting by one man pushing panels up a ladder to another standing on the roof was unsafe;   it did not state the width of tower scaffold required, had no detail about the standard of tower scaffold erection and failed to identify that it would be needed as a base from which to lay roof boards or the need for edge protection;   it failed to provide edge protection to protect the men from a fall from the roof;  and  it failed to impose control measures to prevent the risk of falls through the roof on any of three warehouse roofs. Foildek, whose registered office are at King Street West in Manchester but who work from Stretford Road in Trafford, pleaded guilty to a breach of Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 in that it failed to ensure the safety of an employee at work.

How Much?

£15,000 plus costs

Who

David Clark

When

22 Jan 2007

Where

Chippenham Magistrates Court

Why

David Clark, from East Tytherton near Chippenham in Wiltshire, was found guilty at Chippenham Magistrates Courts of contravening the Working at Height regulations and was fined £2,000 with costs of £1,500.  Construction inspectors from the Bristol HSE office brought the case against Mr Clark after inspecting construction activities Hare Street Farm in Foxham, Chippenham, where Mr Clark and two men he had employed were erecting a farm building. Inspectors found that none of the safety measures required for working at height, such as netting and barriers, had been put in place.  HSE Principal Construction Inspector, Andrew Kingscott, explained the reasons for prosecuting in this non-injury case: "What we are aiming to do is be proactive and prevent injuries before they happen. The construction industry should be aware that where HSE Inspectors identify that standards on site fall well short of those required then, in addition to stopping the work, we could also bring prosecution proceedings.  We are not prepared to wait for an injury to occur before taking action. This initiative of proactive, risk-led prosecutions means cases can be brought to court more quickly. I believe we will see more of this style of enforcement in the future.  In this case, the risks identified were considerable. No steps had been taken, whatsoever, to prevent the three men who were constructing the roof from falling from it. Any fall from this height would have resulted in significant injury or even death. The work was stopped and steps were taken to ensure that it was not completed until suitable protection against the falls was installed. It was considered that risk of injury associated with the work, coupled with the shortfall in the level of control over the risk in this case, warranted prosecution."

How Much?

£2,000 plus costs

Who

Epichem Ltd

When

18 Jan 2007

Where

Wirral Magistrates Court

Why

Wirral chemical company Epichem Ltd was fined £20,000 and ordered to pay £13,416.28 costs at Wirral Magistrates' Court in Birkenhead after pleading guilty to a criminal charge brought by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) following two explosions at the company's premises in Bromborough on 7 December 2004.  One employee, Paul Evans was severely injured, and a second man received minor injuries. The company's premises were badly damaged.  HSE Inspector Dr Jo-Anne Michael who oversaw the HSE investigation of the incident said:  “Guidance for the assessment of chemical reaction hazards is readily available to industry and HSE expects that high standards of design, construction, operation and maintenance to be maintained at all times.  Before any modifications are made to a process, the effect on the overall process safety should be assessed prior to their instigation and the process documentation should be updated accordingly".  The first explosion occurred in Epichem's gallium chloride solvation reactor, causing the release of flammable materials into the plant area where a secondary explosion occurred.  The explosions were caused by an uncontrolled exothermic reaction (severe over heating) during a chemical process.  The company pleaded guilty to a breach of Section 2 (1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 in that it failed to provide and maintain a safe system of work.

How Much?

£20,000 plus costs

Who

Saint Gobain Pipelines plc

When

15 Jan 2007

Where

Derby Crown Court

Why

Mr Roy Howard Moore, 53 of Ripley, Derbyshire received serious leg and pelvic injuries while he was maintaining a conveyor belt at the Saint Gobain Pipelines Plc factory in Ilkeston on 13 December 2004. Saint Gobain Pipelines PLC of Ilkeston had pleaded guilty to charges of breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 and Regulation 17 of the Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 at a previous hearing before Southern Derbyshire Magistrates' Court on 1 December 2006. On 15 January 2007 at Derby Crown Court they were fined £150,000 and ordered to pay HSE's costs of £10,000.  Saint Gobain had previously admitted that, at the time of the incident no adequate systems for the segregation of pedestrians and rail mounted vehicles were in place. If they had been the incident would not have happened.   HSE inspector Kevin Wilson, who investigated the incident, said after the case: "Considering the extent of his injuries Mr Moore has made remarkably good progress - this incident could easily have resulted in a fatality. Each year workplace transport incidents account for around 40 deaths and are the second largest cause of fatal and major injuries at work. It is vitally important that transport movements at workplaces are planned and organised.  This means eliminating or reducing potential contact between vehicles and pedestrians by providing effective physical barriers with appropriate crossing points. All vehicles should be fitted with good visibility aids to overcome any blind spots and ensure drivers are competent and work in a safe manner. All persons who work on the site must have received the necessary information and instruction informing them of these site rules.  HSE can help and advise companies on workplace transport - there's a section on our website which deals with it, and an online assessment to check how well you're doing."

How Much?

£150,000 plus costs

Who

Clearair Property Developments Ltd

When

5 Jan 2007

Where

North Cumbria Magistrates Court

Why

Joiner, Anthony Crack from Newton Aycliffe fell through an unprotected stairwell whilst working on the conversion of a barn at Warwick upon Eden, being undertaken by Clearair Property Developments Ltd. He fell a distance of around two and a half metres and sustained several injuries, including a spinal fracture and a punctured lung.   Clearair, of Victoria Avenue, Bishop Auckland, Durham, was the principal contractor on the site and pleaded guilty to a charge under Regulation 6(3) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005 in that it failed to take suitable measures to prevent Mr Crack from falling a distance likely to cause personal injury.  HSE Inspector David Charnock who managed the case said:  "These injuries could so easily have been prevented. Falls from height are one of the most common causes of injury in construction work, yet with proper protective measures, they are easily preventable.  The accident was typical of the type of preventable falls which remain all too common in the construction industry. Had there been adequate handrails or coverings in place at the stairwell, the accident could not have happened.  Unfortunately, there was nothing to prevent Mr Crack from falling whilst he was working next to the opening. The risks are well known, and the precautions are basic and straightforward.  In 2005/06, 24 people lost their lives as a result of falls in the construction industry, and many more were badly injured. Those working in construction must effectively manage the risk of falls from height, and where they do not, they can expect HSE to take appropriate enforcement action."

How Much?

£1,500 plus costs

Who

Morgan Utilities Ltd and Graham Holt

When

4 Jan 2007

Where

Liverpool Magistrates Court

Why

Morgan Utilities Limited of Newman Street, London and one of their managers, Gordon Holt of Pilling Street in Rochdale, each pleaded guilty to criminal charges brought by the HSE after two employees had been observed by an HSE inspector working in an unsupported excavation, approximately two metres deep in Liverpool City Centre in October 2005. They were fined a total of £11,000 and ordered to pay £9,000 costs.  HSE inspector Neil Jamieson, who took the cases said:  "There was a high risk of collapse and consequent injury given that spoil was stored immediately adjacent to the excavation sides, an excavator was also operating in close proximity to the edge, and the risks were further accentuated from vibration emanating from the nearby Liverpool Underground Railway System.  Two employees of Morgan Utilities were working at the junction of Church Street and Whitechapel Street in Liverpool City Centre installing a new section of 225mm diameter fresh water main in a trench approximately six metres long and just under a metre wide at approximately two metres depth with no shoring to the almost vertical sides of the trench.  Mr Holt, who was managing the work, was aware it was being undertaken in the manner described.  During the last five years HSE had made two visits to sites where Morgan Utilities was carrying out excavation work, which caused concern as people were working in deep, unsupported excavations."  Morgan Utilities pleaded guilty to a breach of Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 (HSW Act) in that it did not provide a safe place of work for its employees. It was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay £8,000 costs.  Mr Holt pleaded guilty to an offence under Section 7 (a) of the HSW Act in that he failed to take reasonable care for the health and safety of other persons who might be affected by his acts or omissions at work whilst carrying out his duties as site supervisor. He was fined £1,000 and ordered to pay £8,000 costs.

How Much?

£11,000 plus costs across the 2 parties