Posted By David A Jones Reportable. I'm also aware of a successful claim arising from slip due to inadequate salting i.e the risk of ice had been identified but what was done did not adeqautely control the risk - and also a claim from someone who was responsible for organising the salting and then slipped on ice due to lack of adequate salting.

Posted By Tony Gladman Reportable....isn't that the ETC part of the HASAW etc Act??????????

Posted By DJ Why is this accident reportable under RIDDOR? My reading of Regulation 3 is that it would only be reportable if the employee was "at work", as he/she does not appear to have a) been at work; b; suffered a major injury; or c) was not taken to hospital, it does not appear to be reporable.

Posted By Daniel Stonehouse I would look at it this way - did it happen on the premises, AND was it through doing something that would be expected of an employee? The employee must enter and leave the premises in order to get to work, so i would say yes.

Posted By Jack How do you know it didn't arise out of or in connection with work, Adrian. Isn't gritting the steps carried out in connection with work? Isn't maintenance of steps?

Posted By joe black As the staff member was leaving the building it comes under safe access and egress and is therefore reportable

Posted By JWG Many thanks for your replies everyone. The qoute below is from www.riddor.gov.uk "RIDDOR '95 requires the reporting of work-related accidents, diseases and dangerous occurrences. It applies to all work activities, but not to all incidents." There appears to be some conflict of opinions. Just to recap, the member of staff was going to the car park and had completed her contractual obligations to work for that day, therefore not carrying out any work activities. The incident is not a 'Major' injury or 'Dangerous Occurrence'. Although she did attend A&E she did not require admittance for over 24hrs. But here's the difficult bit, we have to report "an injury to a member of the public after which was taken to a hospital for treatment." When an employee has finished work and has suffered an injury on the way home, on the site should the reporting criteria be the same as a member of the public?? In my opinion RIDDOR does not apply. I used to agree that if in doubt report. But considering I had five inspections last year, after reporting sometimes borderline incidents, I think there should be clearer definitions from the HSE of what is or is not reportable. Can any enforcement officers out there give there opinions if they expect the incident to be reported? after all they are the ones that enforce these regulations.

Posted By Daniel Stonehouse As the accident happened in: 'any room, lobby, corridor, staircase, road or other place used as a means of access to or egress from that place of work where facilities are provided for use in connection with the place of work other than a public road' - it should be classed as occurring at work. This means that the injured person was an employee at work. It also resulted in a lost time case of more than 3 days. I believe it is reportable.

Posted By Bill Parkinson I would suggest that if you are in doubt then you should speak to an HSE Inspector (prefeably the one assigned to you). I do even though been doing this for over 15 years. In the healthcare sector we have a significant number of falls most of which are related to medical conditions/treatments but occassionally we have a fall where the patient does not recover. In one incident the post mortem revealed that they suffered an inury which caused them to fall and subsequently bang their heads and nothing else was identified as contributing to the death. However, I spoke to the HSE Inspector who advised to report it and then follow up with the coroners report/statement. Incidentally, I reported a RIDDOR incident after 12 months had elapsed after we found that although not marked on the incident report form that the person was likely to be off work, they were signed off for more than 3 days and checking the absence note it was highlighted that the absence was related to the incident. Also remember statute of limitations is 3 years from the date of the injury (or condition in the case of occupational diseases) became known or was diagnosed. If you have failed to report it as a RIDDOR you will more than likley lose any litigation case and also face action from the HSE. One company I know of were fined £ 100,000 for not reporting an incident and the HSE only found out when the claimants solicitor asked for a copy of the RIDDOR report so they took the company to court (they also lost the civil case !). Have a good week-end !! Bill

Posted By Paul Leadbetter But if the injured person is still on the premises whne he slips, surely he as 'at work'? If someone had to cross an ear protection zone to clock on, I would expect them to wear hearing protection because,even though they had not started work, they are 'at work'! Paul

Posted By Adrian Watson Tony, Where in the regs does it say that? Read Reg 3. Regards Adrian

Posted By Barry Cooper Scottie Sorry to disagree, but if you report an accident to the HSE they will include it in the statistics whether it is reportable or not. I know from first hand experience. JWG Report it, it was an accident at work

Posted By Stuart Mallett Just a thought (probably been covered elsewhere!) what if a similar injury (say a back injury requiring hospital treatment and then over 3 days recuperation) happened to a person driving their work provided car whilst travelling to or from work? Not on the premises and possibly not on works time, reportable or not? (actually happened in a former company) HSE said it was reportable. Stu

Posted By gham an engineer claims to have twisted his ankle on a diesel spill on a petrol fourcourt when he was getting out of his van to buy a newspaper in the morning on the way to work. He went to the A&E diagnosed with a sprain signed off for a week This is clearly in connection with his work because he travelling to work in the van provided by the company for him to carry out his duties but he was not in his workplace, (30Mins from it), he had not yet received any work instruction for that day and he was under the occupiers of the petrol stations duty of care, should this have been reported? I thought no, because purchasing the newspaper was not required for him to undertake his duties there for going to the petrol station to buy a paper was not in connection with his work. He didn't need nor was instructed to buy a news paper to carry out his work that day

Posted By Robert K Lewis Gham If the person is a peripatetic engineer it may well be that he is engaged in his employers business from the moment he leaves home - not when he arrives at work. If he had been in his own transport the situatiion might have been clearer, but only a little bit. Hard examples make bad law I am afraid and the interpretation angle is just as bad. If we bring anyone into our premises we are responsible for the state of those premises, employees are a special case of "person", not uniquely different. In your example a good insurance loss adjuster will be looking towards the forecourt taking on the liability. Bob