Marks and Spencer plc, along with 3 of its contractors, have been fined for putting people (including members of the public, staff and construction workers) at risk of exposure from asbestos-containing materials during the refurbishment of two of its stores in Reading and Bournemouth.
M&S were fined £1 million and ordered to pay costs of £600,000. In addition, three contractors were fined £200,000 £100,000 and £50,000 and were also ordered to pay costs.
During the 3-month trial which ended in July 2011, the Crown Court heard that construction workers at the two stores removed asbestos-containing materials that were present in the ceiling tiles and elsewhere. The court heard that the client, Marks and Spencer plc, did not allocate sufficient time and space for the removal of asbestos-containing materials at the Reading store. The contractors had to work overnight in enclosures on the shop floor, with the aim of completing small areas of asbestos removal before the shop opened to the public each day. The HSE also alleged that Marks and Spencer plc failed to ensure that work at the Reading store complied with the appropriate minimum standards set out in legislation and approved codes of practice. The company had produced its own guidance on how asbestos should be removed inside its stores, and the court heard that this guidance was followed by contractors inappropriately during major refurbishment. One contractor failed to reduce to a minimum the spread of asbestos to the Reading shop floor. Witnesses said that areas cleaned by the company were re-contaminated by air moving through the void between the ceiling tiles and the floor above, and by poor standards of work.
The principal contractor at the Reading store, admitted that it should not have permitted a method of asbestos removal which did not allow for adequate sealing of the ceiling void, which resulted in risks to contractors on site. The principal contractor at the Bournemouth store failed to plan, manage and monitor removal of asbestos-containing materials. It did not prevent the possibility of asbestos being disturbed by its workers in areas that had not been surveyed extensively.
The HSE's Southern Head of Operations for Construction, Richard Boland said:
"This outcome should act as a wake up call that any refurbishment programmes involving asbestos-containing materials must be properly resourced, both in terms of time and money - no matter what.
"Large retailers and other organisations who carry out major refurbishment works must give contractors enough time and space within the store to carry out the works safely. Where this is not done, and construction workers and the public are put at risk, HSE will not hesitate in taking robust enforcement action."
Wednesday, 28 September 2011
Friday, 23 September 2011
Cost Recovery: HSE Proposal CD235
From April next year, the HSE will charge companies if they visit them and that visit results in some form of enforcement action. This is not something that the HSE will have discretion about, it will be mandatory.
Gordon MacDonald (the HSE's programme director), said:
"The Government has agreed that it is right that those who break the law should pay their fair share of the costs to put things right - and not the public purse. These proposals provide a further incentive for people to operate within the law, levelling the playing field between those who comply and those who don't. Compliant firms will not pay a penny in intervention fees."
How much might I be charged by the HSE?
Cost recovery would be at an averaged hourly fee for intervention rate, currently estimated at £133, for nearly all HSE staff. The actual costs that will recovered by the HSE will be dependent on the complexity of the investigation that is required to follow all reasonable lines of enquiry, but some guideline figures have been offered:
• Inspection with no action taken - No costs will be recovered
• Inspection which results in a letter - Approximately £750
• Inspection which results in Enforcement Notice - Approximately £1500
• Investigations carried out by the HSE - Ranging from approximately £750 through to several thousands of pounds to, in extreme cases, tens of thousands of pounds.
Want to avoid the HSE Charges?
Ensure that you are (and remain) compliant with the relevant Health and Safety legislation and this will help you to avoid attracting the attention of the HSE:
• Keep your risk assessments reviewed and up to date.
• Ensure that you have adequate control over your contractors.
• Take prompt action to prevent situations developing that may attract the interest of the HSE.
• Ensure that you keep suitable records.
• Keep that employee training is kept up to date.Keep your policies and procedures up to date.
Want to see more detailed information?
Have a look at the HSE's Consultative Document on this subject - Click here
The underlying policy of recovering costs for the HSE’s intervention through the introduction of fees where there is a material breach of the law has already been agreed by the Government. This is, therefore, not in question in this consultation. The consultation document seeks views on the systems being proposed by HSE for how it would implement this policy.
Update (21 October 2011)
The Chemical Business Association (CBA) has branded the Health & Safety Executive’s (HSE) plans to extend cost recovery as the equivalent of seeking a blank cheque from industry to compensate for cuts in its departmental budget. This would see plant owner/operators charged for any ’material breach’ found by its Inspectors and for any ’formal intervention’ required
Mike Ellerby
LRB Consulting Ltd
01509 550023
Web address
Gordon MacDonald (the HSE's programme director), said:
"The Government has agreed that it is right that those who break the law should pay their fair share of the costs to put things right - and not the public purse. These proposals provide a further incentive for people to operate within the law, levelling the playing field between those who comply and those who don't. Compliant firms will not pay a penny in intervention fees."
How much might I be charged by the HSE?
Cost recovery would be at an averaged hourly fee for intervention rate, currently estimated at £133, for nearly all HSE staff. The actual costs that will recovered by the HSE will be dependent on the complexity of the investigation that is required to follow all reasonable lines of enquiry, but some guideline figures have been offered:
• Inspection with no action taken - No costs will be recovered
• Inspection which results in a letter - Approximately £750
• Inspection which results in Enforcement Notice - Approximately £1500
• Investigations carried out by the HSE - Ranging from approximately £750 through to several thousands of pounds to, in extreme cases, tens of thousands of pounds.
Want to avoid the HSE Charges?
Ensure that you are (and remain) compliant with the relevant Health and Safety legislation and this will help you to avoid attracting the attention of the HSE:
• Keep your risk assessments reviewed and up to date.
• Ensure that you have adequate control over your contractors.
• Take prompt action to prevent situations developing that may attract the interest of the HSE.
• Ensure that you keep suitable records.
• Keep that employee training is kept up to date.Keep your policies and procedures up to date.
Want to see more detailed information?
Have a look at the HSE's Consultative Document on this subject - Click here
The underlying policy of recovering costs for the HSE’s intervention through the introduction of fees where there is a material breach of the law has already been agreed by the Government. This is, therefore, not in question in this consultation. The consultation document seeks views on the systems being proposed by HSE for how it would implement this policy.
Update (21 October 2011)
The Chemical Business Association (CBA) has branded the Health & Safety Executive’s (HSE) plans to extend cost recovery as the equivalent of seeking a blank cheque from industry to compensate for cuts in its departmental budget. This would see plant owner/operators charged for any ’material breach’ found by its Inspectors and for any ’formal intervention’ required
Mike Ellerby
LRB Consulting Ltd
01509 550023
Web address
Tuesday, 5 July 2011
Changes in Labels for Hazardous Substances
In different countries all over the world there are different laws governing the identification or classification of the hazardous properties of chemicals and different ways in how information about these hazards is made available to users (through labels, and safety data sheets for workers). Not surprisingly, this leads to confusion as the same chemical can have different hazard descriptions in different countries.Enter the "Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals" (GHS). The aim of GHS is, on a worldwide basis, the same:
• criteria for classifying chemicals according to their health, environmental and physical hazards; and
• hazard communication requirements for labelling and safety data sheets
The GHS is not a formal treaty, but is a non-legally binding international agreement. This means that countries must create local or national legislation to implement the GHS.
What does this mean to you?
If you use hazardous substances, then you have probably noticed that some of those you have bought recently have some different symbols on their labels. The purpose of these new symbols is to enable those who are using the product to determine if there are any health or safety risks with the substance in a (worldwide) uniform manner.
New Symbols?
Very simply, the new symbols are a new version of the traditional orange and black warnings that have been around for many years. They are new because they are starting to be “phased in”.
New Legislation?The changes are being introduced as a result of the EC Regulation No 1272/2008 on Classification, Labelling and Packaging of Substances and Mixtures (CLP). This new Regulation currently exists alongside the UK legislation: the Chemicals (Hazard Information and Packaging for Supply) Regulations 2009 (CHIP4). It should be noted, however, that by 2015 the UK legislation will have been replaced by the EC Regulation No 1272/2008.
More Information to follow - or visit our website http://lrbconsulting.co.uk/
Sunday, 12 June 2011
Some advice for Landlords of Houses of Multiple Occupation
If you're a Landlord of a House in Multiple Occupation (HMO), you may have some serious fire safety responsibilities, as shown by a recent prosecution (see below). This article is intended to provide some simple advice on what to do.
What should you do?
Step 1
First of all, gain a good understanding of the fire safety needs of the premises by conducting a Fire Safety Risk Assessment, or by having one carried out for you.
Step 2
Read the report and carry out the recommendations. Sometimes there are alternatives to the actions presented, but "doing nothing" is not a sensible option. Prioritise the recommendations and make improvements in a sensible manner.
- Fire compartmentation is essential, but can be expensive.
- Fire doors (with smoke seals) are effective at stopping the spread of fire and smoke.
- Keeping escape routes clear of obstructions does not cost much.
- Fire signage is relatively simple and cheap to put right.
- Maintenance of existing systems is simple and effective.
- Determining the actions that should be taken in the event of a fire requires consideration of the premises, the residents, and rescue service policies.
- Providing residents with a fire safety action plan can be an effective way to avoid confusion.
Step 3
Keep the property and the fire safety precautions in a good and serviceable condition. Ensure that the fire detection and fire alarm system and fire fighting equipment and emergency lighting are serviced and maintained.
Step 4
Keep the premises under review. Visit premises at regular intervals and ensure that standards are not deteriorating. Liaise with residents and involve them, particularly if they have a say in how money (such as service charge) is spent.
Step 5
Don't end up in court, like the case below.
Details of a recent prosecution
A landlord has received a suspended sentence following various failures. Following a fire in March 2009 it has been reported that the landlord who owned a house of multiple occupation (or HMO) has received a 6-month suspended prison sentence and been ordered to pay £10,000 in costs. Following the blaze, fire safety investigators found several breaches of Fire Safety Legislation (the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005) at the building. These breaches included included not having suitable fire doors installed and not conducting a sufficient fire safety risk assessment.
Steve Turek (the assistant commissioner for fire safety regulation at the London Fire Brigade) commented:
"This verdict sends out a clear message that if landlords ignore fire safety then they will face serious penalties. [The Landlord] was given plenty of time to improve fire safety inside the property but failed to comply. The London Fire Brigade works hard to make companies and individuals understand their responsibilities under fire safety law and only uses prosecution as a last resort."
If you need help with your fire safety risk assessment, please contact us.
Saturday, 11 June 2011
Help me to increase my client base!
Like many people, I'm looking for ways to increase the number of (Health & Safety) clients that I have.
How to do this?
How to do this?
- Direct mail?
- email campaign? DOING, MailChimp
- (Even more) Networking? LIMITED POTENTIAL FOR THIS
- On selling to existing clients?
- COSHH (Bio)
- MHO to Charn F
- Targeting bigger clients? TRYING TO DO SO
- BL
- Shef U
- Various London FM Co's
- Web-site makeover - DONE
- PR campaign?
- Seminars? - DOING
- Teasing out suitable client contacts from existing sources? - NEED TO DEVELOP FURTHER
Ideas welcome
Wednesday, 18 May 2011
Landlord gets Suspended Prison Sentence for Fire Safety failures
A landlord has received a suspended sentence following various failures. Following a fire in March 2009 it has been reported that the landlord who owned a house of multiple occupation (or HMO) has received a 6-month suspended prison sentence and been ordered to pay £10,000 in costs. Following the blaze, fire safety investigators found several breaches of Fire Safety Legislation (the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005) at the building. These breaches included included not having suitable fire doors installed and not conducting a sufficient fire safety risk assessment.
Steve Turek (the assistant commissioner for fire safety regulation at the London Fire Brigade) commented:
"This verdict sends out a clear message that if landlords ignore fire safety then they will face serious penalties. [The Landlord] was given plenty of time to improve fire safety inside the property but failed to comply. The London Fire Brigade works hard to make companies and individuals understand their responsibilities under fire safety law and only uses prosecution as a last resort."
If you need help with your fire safety risk assessment, please contact us.
Steve Turek (the assistant commissioner for fire safety regulation at the London Fire Brigade) commented:
"This verdict sends out a clear message that if landlords ignore fire safety then they will face serious penalties. [The Landlord] was given plenty of time to improve fire safety inside the property but failed to comply. The London Fire Brigade works hard to make companies and individuals understand their responsibilities under fire safety law and only uses prosecution as a last resort."
If you need help with your fire safety risk assessment, please contact us.
Thursday, 12 May 2011
RIDDOR - A change not in the consultation
The HSE have recently closed their Consultation on changes to RIDDOR and, almost immediately, have announced a change to RIDDOR (without consultation).
From September this year, work-related injuries and incidents that are reportable under RIDDOR will have to be notified to the HSE by its website. It is understood that over half of reportable injuries are already notified to the HSE through the website and that this proportion has been increasing steadily over the past seven years.
The reporting of fatal and major incidents will still be able to be done by phone, in recognition of the need for a more personal response in such circumstances.
From September this year, work-related injuries and incidents that are reportable under RIDDOR will have to be notified to the HSE by its website. It is understood that over half of reportable injuries are already notified to the HSE through the website and that this proportion has been increasing steadily over the past seven years.
The reporting of fatal and major incidents will still be able to be done by phone, in recognition of the need for a more personal response in such circumstances.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)