Posted By Thomas Kennedy
I would guess every local authority has met this issue - myself imcluded. To answer your question fully would take up my short lunch break!

Get yourself a copy of a publication Titled "The Guide to the Management of Safety in Burial Grounds". It's produced by the Associaition of Burial Grounds.

ISBN 0 9541113 0 3

Posted By Nigel Hammond
I agree with Merv. Have these people not an ounce of sensitivity? It's this sort of thing that gives health & safety a bad name. The tabloids would love a story like this.

Couldn't they have worked with the families and cordoned hazardous looking gravestones meanwhile - rather than vandalising them?

When I worked at a local authority, they did risk assessments on memorial stones in a huge cemetery. This was a huge job - so they prioritised areas, divided them in zones, and produced a phased in plan. This was an approach that was 'reasonably practicable'

Perhaps the management of the cemetery need a back to basics training session on the ethos behind the health & safety at work act. This would explain that it is risk based and not a black and white military rule book!

Posted By Ian Bruce
I'd like to thank those who have responded.

Could I just clarify that although I work for a local authority, it is NOT the authority in question.

I must also confess to a personal involvement with this as one of the graves affected belongs to my mother-in-laws parents.

Although I have not read the publication referred to in the first response, I feel, as a health and safety practitioner, that the actions of the authority in question, have been inappropriate. I would have assumed that a more measured response to the incident in the North (was it Harrogate?) would have been to test the stability of gravestones, perhaps basing priority for testing following risk assessment, where age, material of construction or fixing would have been considered.

I have not researched this issue, but there must be a standard, surely, that stone masons work to in terms of structural stability for such things, and this should have been used as a "yard stick".

It is very hard to defend "health and safety" within the family when "knee jerk" actions such as these take place. It does nothing for our profession and even less for the local authorities integrity within the community.

Posted By GWB
I agree with Merv and his choice of words. This is absolutally disgusting and has brought more suffering and distress to all relatives.

I also agree that this could be justified as criminal damage and the police should be brought in to investigate and get the (word Merv used) brought to justice.

GWB

Posted By John Webster
.......which states

"In cases of immediate danger, burial authorities in England and Wales are empowered under the provisions of the Local Authorities Cemeteries Order 1977 (LACO) Article 6(1) to take immediate action to make safe dangerous memorials. However, burial authorities are prohibited from taking direct action to remove an unstable memorial which presents no immediate risk without following the strict procedures laid down in the LACO. This involves posting public notices and seeking the permission of the owners (if they can be identified) before taking action. For work on consecrated areas, the burial authorities have to apply to the bishop of the diocese in which a cemetery is situated ."

On the face of it, I agree it seems like a contravention of the regulations amounting to criminal damage.

Posted By Eric Burt
Maybe I'm missing something here but why didn't the Council simply get in touch with the relatives of the deceased and ask them if they would like the headstone re-set (in concrete or whatever) to make it safe - free of charge. Obviously this could only apply to Council-owned cemetaries.

This would show a caring attitude on the part of the Council; it would reduce the risk of them paying out damages for a headstone falling on someone and save them a packet on paying compensation to relatives for hurt feelings etc.

Posted By Steve Langston
I have been involved with a number of similar situations (as a local authority health and safety officer). The stance outlined is disgraceful, and I add my comments following successful implimentation of memorial inspections at other authorities.

The authorities I have been employed at find it cost prohibitive to write to family members and fund all remedial works (in excess of 75,000 gravestones with a 25% failure/unsafe rate at an average cost of £100 per repair i.e £1.9M repair bill per average authority). And many complain about Council tax increases!

Actions that should have been taken and I would advise:

1. Publicise any tests that are going to be undertaken before taking action, use local newspapers well in advance.
2. Notify the public of who they can contact for further information, both before and during any works.
3. Ensure memorial masons are using best practice (national standards) for fixing new memorials.
4. set up meetings with memorial masons and get them to agree that remedial works should be carried out at cost price to them (as many failures come from lawn memorials laid in the past 5 years) and if they fail tests that soon surely they are unsuitable for their purpose! Trading standards may like to be involved!
5. Standardise a test method (i prefer a push tester as it measurable) although industry cannot agree to its use as it is yet to be proved, but you cannot meaure the force otherwise applied by hand and many complaints come from the use of excessive force! you can defend the use of 25KG force as it is roughly the same as an elderly person leaning on it to help them to stand or an average size 8 year old child leaning on it when playing hide and seek/using it as a climbing frame etc!
6. When failures are found a number of options are available such as lie the immediate risk ones down and write to the family, do it sensitevley though such as put the deceased persons pictures (that form part of the memorial) and text facing up and not face down! fencing the area off but have a procedure of checking it is in place regularly or my preferred option is to use a steel frame that is pushed into the ground and secures the memorial by being strapped to it (£30 to buy each one i believe). Other options include setting the memorial base one third in the ground (dependant on the type) etc.

It is an extremely emotive issue and I have seen in the national press many other equaly insensitive approaches to it, such as placing black bin liners over unsafe memorials, whole scale removal of memorials and burial of memorials under the turf surface so that they remain with the diseased causing family members distress as they can no longer locate the family or friends unless they gain access to the site plans!

This issue is more about Public Relations than health and safety, get it right at the start and the rest is easy!

Hope this helps if you want any more information let me know!

Regards

Steve

Posted By Raymond Rapp
Well...it sounds like to me that some shrewd entrepreneur has found a good money making exercise, dressed up in the guise of health and safety. Perhaps I am just being synical.

Ray