Two Companies Fined After A Worker received serious electrical shock

legal_updates

Had the companies followed the control measures outlined in their respective risk assessments, then this incident would not have occurred.

Author: Ernie Taylor
Published:
Reading time: 3 minutes

This article is 2 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.

Two companies have been fined after a worker received serious electrical burns during demolition work.

Chelmsford Magistrates Court heard how; in April of 2017, two demolition workers employed by sub-contractor R B Haigh & Sons were removing electrical distribution equipment from a switchgear room at a site in Thaxted, Essex. Mr Alan Banks had been told by the Principal Contractor that the electrical equipment had been isolated. To reassure his colleague that it was safe he threw a crowbar at the 400V ac equipment. This came into contact with live exposed wires, causing a flashover and temperatures of several thousand degrees, followed by a subsequent fire. As a result, Mr Banks suffered serious burn injuries and was immediately hospitalised.

Investigations by HSE found that the task being undertaken had not been properly planned and suitable control measures were not implemented to ensure the isolation of the power supply. The principal contractor, A J Wadhams & Co Ltd failed to follow the clear procedures outlined in their risk assessments and method statements, which identified that all electrical equipment must be treated as live unless written authorisation proved otherwise.

Russell Haigh and Stuart Haigh (Partners of R B Haighs & Sons) of Thaxted, Essex, pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 3(1) of the Electricity at Work Regulations 1989 and have been fined £80,000 and ordered to pay costs of £3882.65. AJ Wadhams & Co Limited trading as Wadham Homes of Charterhouse Street, London, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974, and have been fined £80,000 and ordered to pay costs of £3816.60.

After the hearing HSE inspector Adam Hills said “This incident has had a significant impact on Mr Banks life and the injuries could so very easily have been fatal. Had the companies followed the control measures outlined in their respective risk assessments, then this incident would not have occurred. Never assume that an electrical supply is disconnected. Always check with the Distribution Network Operator or a qualified electrician to obtain written proof of isolation before commencing work.”

HSE has published the following guidance on how to safely undertake work in proximity to electricity: http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/books/hsg85.htm
NOTE: Once again, this particular case reinforces the need to ensure that risk prevention measures and precautionary controls are implemented where stated within Risk Assessments and Method Statements – i.e. we do what we say we will do. One could argue that the fact that prevention measures and precautionary controls were specified; but not implemented, is a greater safety management failure. Of course, risk assessment itself is only half the job – Managers and Supervisors must then ensure that workers are then adequately instructed as to the risk prevention measures and precautionary controls to be implemented and then monitor to ensure compliance.

Ernie Taylor

Health & Safety Consultant

Read more by this author

Getting in touch

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