Hi Glenda I'm no expert on this. so probably get shot down in flames. But i would say who ever owns the property where the accident happened or leading the event either supervising or providing the equipment services definitely needs to record the accident in their book otherwise they are trying to falsify a legal document by not wanting to make their accident figures look bad. Also i don't think whether someone is employed or not has any bearing on RIDDOR it is any accident that falls within RIDDOR should be reported whether the person having the accident is employed a volunteer or a child/ student. true fully i think the risk assessments for the activities should have been viewed before the event took place not after, and someone competent or responsible should have read the documents and ensured they where being followed at all times. DFo you feel the accidents could have been avoided where the place that held the activity responsible or failed in some way (sounds likely if 3 people injured). Wait to see what other advice you get from members but i would look to writing a letter stating the above (they should log the accident, risk assessments documents not made available failed to report RIDDOR. I would report the accident yourself (under RIDDOR) making it clear where the accident happened and the venue was unwilling to report. Also if the venue holds any membership or part of a scheme then also report the details to them. Carry out you own investigation taking photos (if still possible) and getting witness statements from anyone that say the accident and any other issues experienced during the stay. Can you give any more details of the accident and what injury's where sustained as this may affect if it is reportable under RIDDOR (personally i would report anyway and LA or HSE may decide to send an inspector down anyway. Hope this helps Phil

I never quite understand the reluctance of employers or occupiers to RECORD accidents, incidents and injuries. RIDDOR is a little different I accept, but in the example you have outlined I suggest that that accident was reportable under RIDDOR (assuming that the trip to hospital was DIRECT) by the occupier of the premises.

I just wish that they would put as much effort into ensuring their practices and procedures are in place as they do into trying to deny that they need to record it ! The trip to hospital was direct.

It is not RIDDOR because: Any person not at work must suffer an injury as a result of an accident arising out of or in connection with work even if that person is taken from the site of the accident to a hospital for treatment in respect of that injury. It is covered by Occupiers Liability 1957 and 1984 because: S2 of the 1957 Act: The common duty of care is a duty to take such care to see that the visitor will be reasonably safe in using the premises for the purposes for which he is invited or permitted by the occupier to be there. S3 of the 1957 Act: An occupier must be prepared for children to be less careful than adults. The 1984 Act specifically extends this to visits made for recreational or educational purposes. Sounds like inadequate maintenance is the cause - sue the school and their insurance company will likely instruct them to settle.

Claire, you beat me to it and I agree, what a dreadfully disapppointing direction this thread has taken, especially as a lot of our time is spent defending 'hrealth and safety' from the sort of sue sue sue attitude that prevails and pervades our working lives, and which is ultimataley responsible for a significant number of silly decisions that we see, and indeed probably the reason why there is a reluctance in this case to record the accident. I thought the thread was about the reporting of an incident. I don't see anything in the post that suggests to me negligence or the need for the get a no win no fee solicitor or sueing etc. Very disappointing indeed. I thought that the accident was reportable as assumed that the person that was injured was a visitor and that the residential school was in effect operating as a business and that the failure of the door could reasonably be construed as being as the result of or in connection with work. Acedemic really

I believe that this is reportable under RIDDOR, but as there is some disagreement amongst those answering this thread, then check with the HSEs Incident Contact Centre

Doesn't seem i was to far of the mark. i would report it anyway and let the bods at the HSE decide whether RIDDOR applies or not at least you have done your bit to ensure the incident was reported. When you first posted i thought the accident might have been related to one of the activities rather than with a shower door. What condition where the other shower doors and other facilities like. As others have said accidents will occur but if general maintenance was poor then the likelihood would increase that an accident would occur. Seems odd to have a shower door made of glass where it is likely to get mistreated what's wrong with an old fashioned shower curtain. My thought around risk assessment was presuming the accident was caused by one of the activities i think it would be to much to ask for a rA for using a shower but there should be some means of reporting faulty equipment. Phil

Thank you for so many useful replies here. I should also have mentioned that two of the injured were children and one was an adult carer who was deemed to be working, (though not for the school directly) at the time of the accident. According to the document I have found via OFSTED this means it should be reported.

Hang on just because someone was taken to hospital that does not necessarily make it reportable. A MoP taken to hospital straight from the accident scene is reportable but a member of staff being taken to hospital would only become reportable if they had to stay in for 24hrs or met the other requirements of RIDDOR (major injury, 3-day'er etc). Don't know about kids and any Ofsted requirements, that's not my bag, so to speak. Phil, the attitude of 'just report it anyway and let the enforcers decide' is one we are trying to get away from in the profession as it portrays a lack of professional competence. Freelance, you're on the civil claims band wagon too!!!!???

Freelance my commenst about RIDDOR reportabel and hosiptals was in relation to the previous two posts (Glenda and Kurdziel)

i appreciate where you are coming from Clairel but all those that have posted seem to have differing views whether it is reportable or not, some times things aren't always black and white and falls into that grey area. From very little i know of RIDDOR then i agree with you about the 24hrs and i believe if resuscitation is required which are some of the requirements then to make it reportable. but equally i don't see the issue of phoning up admitting ignorance or ask for clarity that's what the HSE are there for, to give advice. I'm not one for wasting people's time that are in official position which is why such forums like this are ideal to seek clarification on an issue. No one can know it all and no one in H&S should be expected too. Not sure even if the original poster holds any H&S position or qualification so i don't see the harm in them contacting the HSE. At least that way you know you have done everything possible. I think now knowing a bit more about the accident it was just that, as opposed to rock climbing and 3 people where injured for it to turn out there where no RA or properly trained instructors which could have been a posibility from the original post (always assume the worst lol) fortunately this wasn't the case we can often only comment on what is provided at the time which is why i asked for more details about the accident which has put a slightly different slant on it for me. Quite often i don't think there is any right or wrong answer just opinion and you have to do what you think is right with the information you have. It's no good standing up in court saying Joe Bloggs on IOSH forum said i didn't have to report it. Phil

Again, i agree with you Clairel. Lets get it right first time people, if your unsure - get the facts, before shooting from the hip.

I agree with everyone on this and I think a consensus has been reached. Chris, I think you have summed everything up well including the (seemingly) thorny issue of whether or not there’s a civil case in this. I agree that there are many spurious cases before the courts wasting much time but doesn’t everyone have the right to pursue it if they feel they have a case? Particularly here, where a minor has been injured on account of a door frame falling on him/her, IMO there are questions to answer here and certainly the building owner should have the opportunity to demonstrate duty of care. Our job is to keep these cases out of the courts but lets not berate those who would choose this course of action.