Reset Password

Welcome to our new website

If you have previously had an account with us, please use the forgotten password link to reset your password here. This does not include the password for our CAT system, your existing password will still work. Thank you.

Occupier fined over fragile rooflight fall

Paragon International Ltd (Eurocup T/A) has been prosecuted after a workman was lucky to escape with minor injuries when he fell 6m through a fragile roof on Merseyside in September 2012.

Ormskirk Magistrates heard (1st July) that the 40-year-old man was cleaning guttering between two connected buildings. He was told he should try to stay away from the roof lights, but no practical steps were taken by the company to prevent this happening.

The employee and another worker carried bags of debris to the top of the roof (walking on the metal sheets between the roof lights) where the rubbish could be collected by a forklift truck.

One of the men accidentally stepped onto a roof light and fell into the accounts office below. He suffered bruising to his right side and leg, and injuries to his right hand and back. The court was told the company should have found alternative ways of doing the work safely e.g. by cherry-picker.

Cherry-picker, harnesses or safety netting could have been used

 

Paragon International Ltd, of West Pimbo, pleaded guilty to single breaches of the Work at Height Regulations 2005 and the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999. The company was fined a total of £10,500 and ordered to pay £3,067 in prosecution costs.

Speaking after the hearing, HSE Inspector  Bradley Wigglesworth said

“The worker was extremely lucky not to have been seriously injured or even killed when he fell through the roof light. If he had fallen further along the roof then he would have landed on the concrete warehouse floor.

Paragon International knew the roof lights were fragile but he was simply told to try to avoid them, rather than any action being taken to keep him safe. The company should have carried out a proper assessment of the risks and then controlled them so that the work could be out safely.

They could have used a cherry-picker, harnesses or safety netting, but none of these were chosen. An employee’s life was put at risk as a result.”

Source