Ceiling contractor used hotchpotch scaffold tower

20 September 2012

A worker suffered a multitude of injuries, including a brain haemorrhage, when he fell two metres from an unprotected scaffold tower.

The 43-year-old man, who has asked not to be named, was working for CME Ceilings Ltd when the incident took place on 18 January last year.

The company had been contracted to install a suspended ceiling at Croxteth Sports and Wellbeing Centre in Liverpool. It originally planned to use a scissor lift to reach the ceiling but failed to arrange for the equipment to be delivered to the site, and so the worker used a mobile scaffold tower instead.

Liverpool Crown Court heard that the brakes of the scaffold tower had not been applied and there was no edge protection around the work platform. While the man was on the platform, the scaffold started to move and he lost his balance. He fell two metres and landed on the concrete floor below.



He suffered a brain haemorrhage, fractured skull, collapsed lung, broken collarbone, broken ribs, broken wrist, and multiple broken fingers. He stayed in intensive care for two weeks and has been unable to return to work owing to his injuries. His brain injury has also had a long-term impact on his personality.

An HSE investigation found the scaffold tower was made up of parts from several different manufacturers, all of which were in a poor or damaged condition.

HSE inspector Mark Baker said: “One of CME Ceiling’s employees has suffered severe physical and mental injuries that will affect him for the rest of his life.

“The scaffolding tower the company provided simply wasn't up to the job and his life was put in danger the minute he started to climb it.

“This case should act as a warning to firms not to cut corners and to make sure they use the right equipment for the job they're doing.”

CME Ceilings appeared in court on 18 September and pleaded guilty to breaching s2(1) of the HSWA 1974. It was fined £5000 and ordered to pay the same amount in costs.

Add a comment Print  
Again a case with overwhelming evidential failure results in a low fine. WAH is repeatedly breached, injury and fatality persist at an alarming rate and the solution applied seems to be limited to new HSG. I wonder what significant improvement will result from that considered responce? (you can only hope that the new FFI will seriously kick in and impose improved compliance)
bob
Fully agree Bob, non-compliance is ubiquitos, these people only get caught when there is a serious accident - tip of the iceberg. The penalties are too low and that is why companies take the risk. The company 'planned to use a scissor lift'. Really? Why pay for a scissor lift when you can use a dodgy ally tower instead which costs nothing to install. No mention of the Client or CDMC as usual - I wonder if this was a notifiable project?
ray
When is the punishment going to fit the crime? This mans life is ruined all because his employer is scrimping on supplying the correct equipment and training. I have a friend who I have just pasma trained and he nearly got sacked because he would not lift a 4 metre high tower across a railway line. ( this was at 03.00hours) Health and Safety is all very well but the enforcing authorities need to pay more surprise visits to the workplace, this especially includes the ORR in may experience
t
It is unbelievable that a case is taken to a Crown Court and results in such a low fine.Such a low fine is hardly likely to send a warning to any company that careless working practices are unacceptable. CME Ceilings could easily have located a suitable scissor lift company had they really wished too.
csandifo@sgul

Join SHP Online

  • ✔ Download free reports and research
  • ✔ Access free Digital magazine
  • ✔ Email newsletter briefings