Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
boblewis  
#1 Posted : 17 October 2010 11:17:02(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
boblewis

Yet another significant contractor, Morris and Spottiswood, find themselves with a closed down area of work following the "discovery" of asbestos during a major refurbishment of a retail store ( Scunthorpe Evening Telegraph Sat 16th Oct). A Major retailer purchases a 1960s building in Jan 2010 and undertakes a major refurbishment with significant structural work and yet asbestos is undiscovered. According to some persons material was disposed of in an open skip before recognition - When will we ever learn?? The HSE comment is a pearl of apparent understatement - "We are aware of the situation". Not even "and we are investigating" added to it. So much for asbestos being a major concern perhaps!! Bob
boblewis  
#2 Posted : 19 October 2010 16:44:03(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
boblewis

I have just heard that this contractor and another major retail group have been found guilty of asbestos offences in Scotland - I do not know if this is correct Bob
peter gotch  
#3 Posted : 19 October 2010 16:59:30(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
peter gotch

Here you are Bob. The jungle drums operate very quickly down your way!! http://www.bbc.co.uk/new...burgh-east-fife-11573465
boblewis  
#4 Posted : 19 October 2010 21:09:26(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
boblewis

Peter Many thanks for the link. Round here there is almost a sense of despair at the HSE laid back response and a belief that they are just word mongers with no wish to bite! It is amazing that a party already undergoing one prosecution is not investigated agaqin for a similar failure. I am sure our HSE posters can explain this, I cannot. We were just beginning to believe that this really was a high priority with the HSE. Bob
bod212  
#5 Posted : 20 October 2010 07:55:05(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
bod212

The comment, if accurate, from Fiscal McGovern regarding the first two types only being suitable for households is not correct. I do accept that as the offence occurred in 2008 there were still three survey types though and a type three survey should have been carried out at this location. The offence is not what you expect from two very large and allegedly 'reputed' organisations. Conversely, based on the above comment other parties leave a lot to be desired in their knowledge and expertise as well.
IanDakin  
#6 Posted : 20 October 2010 16:58:05(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
IanDakin

Hi A few years ago the company I work for took over a new premises in Greater London, and commissioned a survey for asbestos. The contractor who carried out the survey noted down all the areas they had either not accessed or had not sampled. Also in their report they said they had undertaken a type 3 survey. Luckily myself and my manager are both p402 and 405 qualified so we picked this up. But for organisations relying solely on the (accredited) contractor, this could have been a problem.
boblewis  
#7 Posted : 20 October 2010 22:26:03(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
boblewis

Ian I can fully empathise with this sort of issue, re-labelling a type 2 (in old money!!) as a type 3 merely by adding a list of non sampled/accessed areas has been a running sore for maqny in the industry. My gut feeeling on this is that the lawyers accepted happpily a type 2 survey during due diligence, if they thought about it, and this was then deemed as all necessary information by the client during design. No one asked questions and we end up with another uncontrolled encounter with asbestos. Still the HSE are monitoring it so we are all safe!! Sorry but my cynicism is showing clearly Bob
Ron Hunter  
#8 Posted : 21 October 2010 00:48:43(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Ron Hunter

Note that the Edinburgh incident (according to the BBC story) was prosecuted by EHOs and not HSE. In fairness to the Fiscal, he has to be guided by the Repory prepared by the prosecuting officers, who it would appear were somewhat out-of-date and perhaps inaccurate with some of their background information. Still, never mind - just a shop. Presumably "low risk" in this brave new world, and therefore exempt in future !!!!!!? Certainly nothing that warrants spending bags of cash on any sort of consultant anyway...........
boblewis  
#9 Posted : 21 October 2010 11:07:52(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
boblewis

Ron I do believe you are becoming as cynical as I am over some things:-)!!!!!!!!!!!!! Bob
Ron Hunter  
#10 Posted : 21 October 2010 23:48:59(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Ron Hunter

Bob, As John Murray says elsewhere on the popular thread discussing the 'Dandy Beano' -no sorry- I meant Lord Young's Report, cynic is a name given to a realist by an optimist. ;-) Ron.
boblewis  
#11 Posted : 22 October 2010 20:09:29(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
boblewis

Ron I suppose our realism would be funny if the asbestos problem was not so serious. I think many know that my first industrial exposure to crocidolite was in my first year at university for a period of 6 months. I am now past the 40 year mark and on the far end of the probability Bell curve. I can now start to relax. But situations such as this really cause me a great deal of angst. Bob
Users browsing this topic
Guest
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.