Rank: Forum user 
|
I have seen many case studies in construction coming from various sources showing how the new sentencing guidelines for Health and safety offences have seen significant penalties given to contractors and principle contractors.
Does anyone know of any case studies under CDM 2015 where this culpability has been given mainly to the commercial client? (failure to ensure the right principle contractor was appointed)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
James
From memory the client is rarely prosecuted even when there is evidence they have not fully complied with CDM. There are exceptions of course and below is a very recent case. Apart from the level of fine being exceptionally high, I can't help feel the unfortunate self-employed contractor should have been held partially responsible for not ensuring a SSoW was adopted.
https://www.shponline.co.uk/1m-fine-worker-dies-ladder-fall/
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
So the failure was not planning a safe method of work, presumably the job could have been performed more safely with a platform or mobile tower as he had to hold the motor with both hands, I agree the contractor should have decided the safe method but I know clients who will insist on a 'quick job' .......
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
So the inexpert Client fell into a culpability trap by directing or interfering with how work was to be done AND providing the ladder.
If the Client had conducted due diligence checks around engaging a competent contractor and left them to get on with it, there's every chance that Client could have avoided prosecution.
A salutory lesson for many.
|
 2 users thanked Ron Hunter for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
...or, if the client had requested RAMS from the self-employed contractor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Hi,
http://press.hse.gov.uk/release-type/press/
Have a look through the HSE press releases. Over the past years there have been cases on clients being prosecuted.
The Principal Contractor and Contractor would normally be prosecuted for failings during the "construction" phase of a project.
The client would be prosecuted if there were failings during the "pre-construction" phase that linked through to the construction works, for example not ensuring a suitable Construction Phase Plan was in place prior to construction work taking place or adequate welfare facilties were provided for the construction phase.
I hope this helps.
|
1 user thanked Woolf13 for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
A bit early in the Courts cycle for much in the way of CDM2015 prosecutions perhaps.
There's a sobering 2011 case mentioned in the RoSPA OS&H Journal of July 2017 against a Client guilty of breach of Reg9(1) of CDM2007, failure to take reasonable steps to ensure that the arrangements made for managing the project (including the allocation of sufficient time and other resources)... were suitabl...(etc.)
The CDM Client was fined £500,000 with £100,000 costs
The PC was fined £200.000 with £50,000 costs
4 workers died at the scene when formwork for a large concrete slab collapsed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.