Fines & Costs of £812K Following Death Whilst Laying Floor Adhesive

legal updates

No systems or procedures had been implemented to adequately control the risks to the health and safety of employees.

Read our disclaimer keyboard_arrow_down

This website content is intended as a general guide to law as it applies to the motor trade. Lawgistics has taken every effort to ensure that the contents are as accurate and up to date as at the date of first publication.

The laws and opinions expressed within this website may be varied as the law develops. As such we cannot accept liability for or the consequence of, any change of law, or official guidelines since publication or any misuse of the information provided.

The opinions in this website are based upon the experience of the authors and it must be recognised that only the courts and recognised tribunals can interpret the law with authority.

Examples given within the website are based on the experience of the authors and centre upon issues that commonly give rise to disputes. Each situation in practice will be different and may comprise several points commented upon.

If you have any doubt about the correct legal position you should seek further legal advice from Lawgistics or a suitably qualified solicitor. We cannot accept liability for your failure to take professional advice where it should reasonably be sought by a prudent person.

All characters are fictitious and should not be taken as referring to any person living or dead.

Use of this website shall be considered acceptance of the terms of the disclaimer presented above.

A supplier and a flooring company have both been sentenced following the death of a floor layer in London Westminster Magistrates’ Court heard that on 4 September 2015, 30-year-old Paul Tilcock was found dead on the bathroom floor by the owner of a house in Mitcham. The adhesive used to fix the flooring contained a large amount of a toxic substance.

Investigation by HSE Inspectors found that T Brown Group Ltd. had not implemented any systems or procedures to adequately control the risks to the health and safety of its employees when working in an enclosed space with a substance known to be hazardous to health, namely dichloromethane. The decision as whether to wear respiratory protective equipment (RPE) or what type of RPE should be used was left up to employees. When Mr Tilcock’s body was found he was wearing a completely ineffectual face mask.

T Brown Group Ltd of High Street, Ewell, Surrey pleaded guilty to a breach of Section 2 (1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 (the Act). The company was fined £250,000 and ordered to pay full costs of £23,936.

Altro Limited, the company supplying the flooring adhesive, was found not to have ensured so far as reasonably practicable that the product as supplied was safe to use at all times. Altro Ltd. pleaded guilty to a breach of Section 6 (4) of the Act 1974. The company was fined £500,000 and ordered to pay full costs of £34,773.

After the hearing, HSE inspector Peter Collingwood said: “This tragic incident which has had a devastating effect on a young family was wholly avoidable. It is important that companies have an appreciation of their duties, (whether to its employees or its customers) and have effective systems and procedures in place to ensure that those duties are fulfilled”.

NOTE: This very sad case demonstrates the need on Employers to carry out task-specific risk assessments. In this case working in an enclosed work area (the bathroom of a domestic property) with a product that was known to be a hazardous substance (therefore a COSHH Assessment was needed). The case also highlights the need for information; instruction and training when working with hazardous products (the flooring adhesive) and the same as regards the provision of suitable PPE (in this case the requirement for suitable RPE.). Exposure to harmful levels of any dusts, fumes, vapours, mists, gases that are a consequence or the work done (or due to the product being used) must be adequately addressed. RPE should not always be the employers first consideration. Once again, a family has been devastated by the loss of a young father, a death that was wholly avoidable.

WeRecruit Auto LtdPermanent Automotive Recruitment from an experienced and trustworthy recruitment partner.

We cover roles within all departments and sectors of the Automotive industry, and are here to listen to your specific needs and find the most suitable candidates to fit your business.

Ernie TaylorHealth & Safety ConsultantRead More by this author

Related Legal Updates

Toilet provision in the workplace

It’s hard to imagine this sensible judgment was not a relief for all the employees involved in the use of these toilets.

Can my employees tell me it is too hot to work?

Bosses should make sure they are doing all they can to keep their people cool, especially in areas where machinery might generate extra heat.

Managing Home Workers’ Health and Safety

The guidance published by the HSE about home working has been redesigned and expanded to provide more detail on straightforward actions to manage the homeworkers’ health and safety.

Site Supervisor Fined After Worker Suffered Serious Injuries

Remind your Managers and Site Supervisors about their delegated responsibilities for health and safet

HSE update – Control Of Substances Harmful to Health (COSHH)

COSHH requirements will be particularly relevant for any business running a repairs workshop.

Aiming for excellence – 10 Targets for your own risk assessments

We all recognise and understand that risk assessments are a statutory requirement.

Employer Sentenced After Oil Drum Explodes

Fined £80,000 and ordered to pay costs of £8,167.

Get in touch

Complete the form to get in touch or via our details below:

01480 455500

Vinpenta House
High Causeway

By submitting this quote you agree to our Terms & Conditions and Privacy & Cookies Policy.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.