Informa Markets

Author Bio ▼

Safety and Health Practitioner (SHP) is first for independent health and safety news.
October 28, 2009

Company owner cut safety corners to save money

The owner of a demolition firm ignored the advice of an HSE inspector and continued to use an unsafe method for working at height, which resulted in a labourer falling through a roof.

Norwich Magistrates’ Court heard that Tim Philpott, trading as Philpott Demolition and Recycling, had been contracted to demolish an aircraft hanger at the former RAF Watton site in Norfolk.

A HSE inspector visited the site on 21 March 2007 and found workers removing tiles from the roof of the hanger by cutting holes in the roof and dropping the tiles into a bucket, which was sitting on the platform of a telehander. The inspector told Philpott that this was an unsuitable method for working at height, and advised him to provide a tower platform, or a cherry-picker for the workers to stand on to continue the job.

Following the visit Philpott amended the method statement, but work continued without incorporating the inspector’s recommendations. On 20 April, one of his employees, Gediminas Vasiliauskas, was using a saw to remove the tiles when he fell through a hole in the roof, landing on a concrete floor, three metres below. He suffered a broken spine and had surgery to insert a metal disk into his back. He has also lost his sense of taste and smell, and was unable to return to work for more than a year.

HSE inspector Nicola Surrey told SHP: “Mr Vasiliauskas was lucky to survive this incident, which could have been avoided if his employer had taken the recommended precautions to ensure his employees’ safety.”

Philpott attended court on 22 October and pleaded guilty to breaching s2(1) of the HSWA 1974. He was fined £7500 and no costs were awarded.

In mitigation, Philpott said he regretted the incident, and the company is no longer trading. He asked the court to be lenient in sentencing owing to a lack of means.

Inspector Surrey added: “One of the aggravating factors in this case was that the method of work adopted was driven by the desire of the duty-holder to reduce costs. Mr Philpott had been advised by the HSE to use either a cherry-picker or a tower scaffold to continue the work, but he ignored this advice, as it would have made him incur additional costs to complete the job.”

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!

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

0 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments