Informa Markets

Author Bio ▼

Safety and Health Practitioner (SHP) is first for independent health and safety news.
July 25, 2011

Get the SHP newsletter

Daily health and safety news, job alerts and resources

Surprise inspection uncovers roof-renovation errors

A proactive inspection by the HSE uncovered serious safety failings by a company that was carrying out roof repairs at a house in Croydon.

On 28 April 2009, the HSE carried out an inspection at the property after noticing that the scaffolding was poorly positioned. The inspector found that Brunwin Professional Roofing Services Ltd had been contracted to repair the property’s roof, but the job had expanded, at the owner’s request, to remove and replace rotten barge boards from the pitch roof.

In order to remove the barge boards workers also needed to detach soffits, which were holding the boards in place. So that they could create space to move the soffits they took out two scaffold boards, which left an unprotected gap between the building and the scaffold that was large enough for the two workers on site to fall through.€

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

2 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Aidan
Aidan
13 years ago

I Mike…. am very minded to agree with you. I think someone has messed up on the Asbestos prosecution side of things.

Mhcrick
Mhcrick
13 years ago

Other offenses understandable but temporary removal of asbestos-cement soffit boards? Is this not ACM “firmly linked in a matrix” and in addition taking minutes to do, is a “short non-continuous maintenance activity” so does it need to be licenced or notified? Is this prosecution not contrary to reg.3 and HSE’s own guidance (Asbestos Essentials p.3)?

Topics: