Posted By Tarquin Farquor
CFT,

Could you re-word the question, I don't understand what it is asking.

Regards,

TF

Posted By CFT
To clarify my question further; I have a very large acre site that is currently shut and contains many old industrial units. Power is shut down, foreseeable risks have been assessed and removed as far as possible. I have 24/7 security and a Police interest as perpetrators have broken through the 2 metre high chain link fence and are stealing small quantities of copper wire and pipe work, (as yet they evade capture).

Whilst I would like to think I have every eventuality covered to afford protection to these uninvited visitors, there is always a very small possibility that their subsequent actions could in fact end in electric shock from the act of ripping wiring out from the walls of some buildings.

I am satisfied that I have done all that could be done to remove the hazards, but my underwriters have insisted on power and water remaining to the fire alarms and the sprinkler system, (standard electric pump with back up Perkins diesel engines). There is therefore a remote possibility that the removal of wiring could end in a fatality by hacking out a live circuit; access to the site is across a high speed very busy railway line to the rear of the site and the CCTV is so old it is ineffective. The site will be demolished eventually and new sheds constructed; I am satisfied the signs (both written and pictogram, in several languages) the RA's, security, Police involvement, 2 metre chain link fence, asbestos infested areas boarded up with shuttering ply and blind fixings, (register at type 2 relevant and up-to-date)increased security at night, all non-essential electricity isolated and locked back to trannies, every area padlocked that can be etc etc.

My question therefore was based on what action could be taken against me based on the Occupiers Liability Act 1984 (trespassers)and by whom; I am as satisfied so far as is possible that any subsequent HSE/Police investigation into a fatality would not hold me accountable as I do genuinely feel I have really done all that could be done SFAIRP, yes I could post private security at 50 metre intervals to prevent any access but this is not financially viable nor RP; day time is fine but at night the UV's arrive in force, as soon as the Police arrive or security sit to monitor the half mile area of fence they wait until the coast is clear, one was witnessed wearing night vision goggles of all things and escaped over the railway line, through the hole cut in the fence; I mend it they cut through another section, the escape route is across old flood plains and Police resources will not of course allow for a helicopter to be brought in for what is after all petty theft.

I really just got to wondering what the worst case scenario may have been. I have at least several more months yet to look after the site.

CFT

Posted By Paul Duell
As far as I can remember, liability for trespassers under OLA depends on "implied licence" - e.g. if you've left a gate wide open, or a damaged fence unrepaired, you're letting people onto your land. If you've taken all the precautions you describe and they can only get in by cutting fences, dodging patrols etc, I'd say they'd find implied licence pretty hard to prove.

Again this is just from memory, but I don't think you can be criminally prosecuted under OLA (although as other have said, don't forget HASAWA section 3). OLA allows those who have suffered loss as a result of your breach to sue - typically this would be IPs or their families, dependents etc. But remember the need for them to prove implied licence as above.

HTH

Posted By CFT
One of the cases I am extremely familiar with due to the fact we have a lake at one of our sites that suffered two fatalities under earlier ownership.

CFT

Posted By Tarquin Farquor
Sorry the 2nd part should read if 18

Posted By CFT
You have all been most kind, and I thank you for your input.

Chazza

Posted By CFT
Thanks Drew, a point often overlooked with the younger intruder. I have also visited local schools in the area to warn of the danger in accessing a potentially dangerous and unoccupied site, hopefully my lectures will not tempt them to come from a curiosity standpoint!.

CFT

Posted By Guillaume LeChat
Charlie - From memory the Loss Prevention Council (now covered by the FPA I think)produce a very useful document entitled "The Protection of Unoccupied Buildings" which provide very useful guidance on what is deemed acceptable. I know exactly where you are coming from with repeated attempts to gain access as I am going through exactly the same at present with one of our buildings. Hope you find the above document helps you. Regards

Posted By CFT
Thanks all,

Gary

Good points and I have even put written and pictorial information on the live areas although they are minimal.

I note this morning they have been in again, and removed the 'tails' for connection for a 4 mega watt supply that has had to utilise our land to access a nearby site, the tails were left for connection and they have been cut off and removed flush with the ground, thank goodness that one wasn't live, it would certainly have lit up.

CFT