CORPORATE MANSLAUGHTER - 12.05.2014

Don’t ignore your duties

Death at work

Malcolm Hinton (H) had worked for Mervyn Owens (O), a director of Mobile Sweepers (Reading) Ltd (MS) for around 15 years when he was killed. He regularly undertook maintenance on machinery although he had not received any training. One evening he was working on an urgent repair to a defective machine which was required the following day. But whilst the hopper of the 14-year-old road sweeper was raised, he mistakenly removed a hydraulic hose. This caused the half tonne hopper to collapse.

Investigation

Investigators from Hampshire Police and the HSE found that a prop was available to support the hopper during maintenance, but the machine was in such poor condition that the prop couldn’t be used. In court, prosecutors illustrated how the company was “run on a shoestring” with minimal, if any , regard for health and safety. There was no health and safety policy, no training, and repairs appeared to be sacrificed to maximise profit. All six of the company’s sweepers were in a poor state of repair.

The charges

MS pleaded guilty to a charge under s.1 of the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 (CMCHA). The company was fined £8,000 and ordered to pay £4,000 in costs, the lowest fine to date under the CMCHA. It was also ordered to publicise its guilty plea in the national press. By the time of the prosecution the company had ceased trading but had not been wound up. O had by that time started a new company: Owen Sweepers Ltd. It’s unclear whether the setting up of a new company was intended to deflect any penalty that might otherwise be imposed but, if so, it was ineffective.

Personal

At the same hearing, O pleaded guilty to breaching s.2 of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 . The judge found that he and his company were indivisible from each other and having taken account of his assets, such as property, he was fined £183,000 and banned from holding a directorship for five years.

Root cause

The HSE inspector pointed out that a planned preventive maintenance regime would have avoided the need for a rushed repair: urgent repairs are more likely to involve the taking of unnecessary risks. Secondly, as shown in this case, the safety mechanisms which are built in to equipment deteriorate along with the general condition. So only carrying out re-active maintenance places those undertaking such work at increasing risk as the machine ages.

Tip 1. Managers must ensure that risk assessments are undertaken for machinery maintenance activities. Even when staff are properly qualified, the risks are high and they should not be left to create their own methods of work without scrutiny.

Tip 2. Never rely on hydraulics to support the weight of raised vehicles. Props must always be used.