Motorhouse 2000 Ltd fined for chemical injuries to boy on work experience


The company failed to avoid exposure to the chemical and should have provided him with safety goggles.

Author: David Combes
Reading time: 1 minute

This article is 9 years old.

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 16 year old boy suffered burns from remnants of toxic paint stripper when assisting another employee refilling a wheel stripping tank according to a recent HSE report. 

The boy was cutting labels off containers in order to aid their disposal and some of the product left in the container flicked up into his eyes and his face.  His vision was seriously affected for a month and he experienced scarring on his face.

Effectively the company failed to avoid exposure to the chemical and should have provided him with safety goggles.

The company was fined £4000 and had to pay costs of £6319.

David Combes

In remeberance of David Combes 1948 – 2020

Read more by this author

Getting in touch

You can contact us via the form or you can call us on 01480 455500.