Posted By J Knight Hi Skooter, No, accidents on the way to work aren't accidents for the purposes of the BI510, which is to serve as a record for Industrial Injuries Claims, John

Posted By Glyn Atkinson Referring to Merv's mail, we used to suffer weekend sporting injuries, especially the rugby players' special - the fractured wrist bone (scaphoid??). We had to register an interest to BARLA (Amateur Rugby Assoc.)through our insurance investigators so that we could track players in action or injuring themselves during local games, then sneaking into work and "having an early Monday accident!" We went through over 20 previous "accidents" and 4 current ones that were eventually removed from our compensation files. It's not an easy Safety life when people try to present those off site incidents as work related accidents - time, money and effort to defend and research !!

Posted By skooter1 I logged it anyway in the book just in case. thank you for your help

Posted By Patrick Burns CMIOSH - SpDipEM - MIQA Hi Julia Why did you have to report it? 1. As it was a Company Vehicle then it might have been construed that whilst in the vehicle he was at work. 2. Did the injury fall under RIDDOR i.e. broken bone, off for over three days? It would be interesting to know the answer to 'Why'.

Posted By Christopher Kelly I don't think they would have been considered as being at work whether in a company vehicle or not, for RIDDOR purposes. However there is the issue about whether the company had issued sufficient guidance, training etc on: maintenance of company vehicle (ie why did they have a flat tyre in the first place); manual handling; methods for wheel changing etc. There was an interesting article in SHP recently about employers responsibilities for drivers on company business (whether in company cars or not). I think the point is that the incident may not be covered by RIDDOR but that is a defect in the legislation. Is there possibility of litigation, lost time etc ? Yes - then it is sensible to go through accident reporting and investigation procedures. If you have a system of continuous improvement you can always better the legislation and that is the most important thing. Interesting debate ! Regards

Posted By Saracen11 Hi Skooter1, to bring all the loose ends together here… the key element in deciding to report lies in if the person was carrying out a work activity i.e. a recognised part of his duties (whether as part of his contract or an assumed role). If not, then there’s no reason to report. Commuting between places of work is still a work activity e.g. a peripatetic worker… Don’t report an incident “Just to be on the safe side” It might not count in your statistics but it will do in the enforcing authorities! Not only will it draw attention to your organisation for frequent reports but also if incorrectly reported i.e. not falling into the reportable category, it demonstrates a lack of understanding of the regulations and may constitute a lack of confidence in management from the enforcing authority. Regards.

Posted By Julia Bicker Hi. We had to report it because he was signed off work for more than 3 days. Sorry, should've said this in my original post.

Posted By J Knight Hi Julia, I am amazed, as other posters (such as Cathy) really have quoted chapter and verse on what the reporting requirement is. I suspect that the person in the Incident Reporting Centre (not an HSE employee, by the way, but an employee of National Brittannia: they are very good but they're not the HSE) interpreted your accident as an accident on the highway other than an RTA, which is reportable if at work, but this category is intended to capture accidents to roadside construction and maintenance workers. In any event, there is case law (Vandyke v Fender and Another) which indicates that driving to work is not in the scope of somebody's employment; and that's the way I would view it, John