Informa Markets

Author Bio ▼

Safety and Health Practitioner (SHP) is first for independent health and safety news.
August 20, 2012

Get the SHP newsletter

Daily health and safety news, job alerts and resources

Fraudsters collude to file false asbestos report

Two men have admitted falsifying a record stating that a school in Oxfordshire had been properly cleaned of asbestos.

Maylarch Environmental Ltd was contracted to clear asbestos, which had been disturbed during the removal of a boiler at Our Lady’s Abingdon School. The company carried out licensed asbestos work at the school between 21 and 25 July 2010.

Environmental consultants Tersus Ltd had been contracted to provide a final independent assessment of the clean-up. On 25 July 2010, Ricky Gray (no relation) arranged to meet Maylarch Environmental emplyee David Gray to complete the assessment. The two men signed a report stating the work had been suitably completed.

The following day, an engineer visited the school to install a new boiler and became concerned that asbestos was still present. He immediately contacted the HSE and an investigation was launched.

The HSE learned that both Tersus and Maylarch Environmental believed the site had been made safe after they received the report. Tersus launched its own investigation and used GPS tracking on Ricky Gray’s van. The tracker showed the vehicle had been driven to a service station on the M40 and then back to his home address, proving he hasn’t visited the school.

He later admitted he had met David Gray and together they had fabricated the clearance report to make it look as though the assessment had been carried out.

Ricky Gray and David Gray appeared at Oxfordshire Magistrates’ Court on 17 August and both pleaded guilty to breaching s7 of the HSWA 1974. Ricky was fined £4000 and £1000 in costs; David was fined £1000 and ordered to pay £250 in costs.

In mitigation, both accepted they had done wrong and said they regretted their actions. Neither have any previous safety convictions and they no longer work for the companies they represented.

After the hearing, HSE inspector Andrew Moore said: “This was an unusual fraud, the first of its type that I am aware of. It was only detected thanks to Mr Benfield’s [the engineer who visited the school on 26 July] knowledge and perseverance, and the use of GPS technology.

“It was also a serious fraud, as it may have exposed other workers coming on to the school site to the very real dangers of inhalation of asbestos fibres.

“I can only have an educated guess at what motivated these two to collude in this fashion.”

The Safety Conversation Podcast: Listen now!

The Safety Conversation with SHP (previously the Safety and Health Podcast) aims to bring you the latest news, insights and legislation updates in the form of interviews, discussions and panel debates from leading figures within the profession.

Find us on Apple Podcasts, Spotify and Google Podcasts, subscribe and join the conversation today!

Related Topics

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

5 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Alexhoward_121
Alexhoward_121
11 years ago

It’s easy isn’t it? Do all the things that you have to to become licensed – (that’s your investment) then don’t do the job properly to max profit (return on the investment!). No-one will ever know & by the time people start to have symptoms in 25 years, there’s a report saying a licensed firm removed all the asbestos & a survey saying it was all clear – ergo – no evidence!
How many other reports have these ‘rogue traders’ just made up? This case should have gone to crown not magistrates court

Andrew
Andrew
11 years ago

Pathetic fines. For fraud it should be a custodial sentence (perhaps suspended if there is mitigation) but a fine of £4000 is too little.

Bob
Bob
11 years ago

Yet another shocking endorcement of the Asbestos Fraternity.

Are we to believe that these so called “specialists” only chose this one occasion to avoid thier reposibilities to the wider community? BS.

No previous convictions, not caught previously, possibly?

I hope that all the other buildings that they had passed as all clear are going to be revisited?

Somehow I doubt it, and no doubt the exposure threat will be played down becsues of vacarious liability?

Utter Parasites.

Gordon
Gordon
11 years ago

I am surprised at such a light sentance and the fact what they had left for othersto be come exposed to how many people could have been exposed to this evil substance and the years of worry

Zacedwards13
Zacedwards13
11 years ago

And our experts in Parliament say Health and Safety is a waste of time, they condone such practices as this-DO THEY?

Topics: