I had to read it a few times to be sure what you were getting at. It hasn't happened to me but I suppose that you could have a situation where both a DO and an over 7 day injury both occur. Either a DO happened or it didn't, I don't think you can decide to ignore it just because a reportable injury also resulted from the same. It can't be a unique occurrence; surely?

I think you've done well, and followed all the correct procedures. We can only make a judgement with the current information that we have. It would be good idea to refer to DO as that was what it was at the reporting time and even better if First Aid was administered or witnesses present. This in turn will show that you have done everything reasonably practicable. I would agree that it would have a effect on your incident stats but in real life we can se how the health of the person involved deteriorated and that escalated the origanl DO to a RIDDOR.

Dan, When you report any incident you get an incident number, submit an update using the original Incident Number and quote it on any future correspondence you send to the HSE or any other interested party. Let the HSE match it all up. Tell them it was initially a DO and is now an over 7. They are aware circumstances change. I am assuming that the stats you are worried about are your own in house stats that are used to report to the directors and asked for when tendering for new works. I see no reson why you cannot remove the DO and put it down as an over 7 now. You could even put in a footnote explaining if you want. On just about every RIDDOR I have submitted online, I have followed up with a covering letter and a copy of our own internal investigation with recommendation - warts an all. I think too many people get het up with regarding RIDDOR Incidents - as long as you can show you have reported it factually and within the time frames I think the HSE will be more concerned ensuring actions have been taken to prevent re-occurance than if the I's and T's were not dotted and crossed. Regards Clive

Listen to Ron and others as its in certain cases a telephone call is required as the quickest practicable means and not the use of the online system and if I were U I would review the new RIDDOR changes so as its on the tip of the tong all other areas are spurious to the requirements of RIDDOR

http://www.hse.gov.uk/contact/maps/index.htm

My post at #7: should say "substance release" ( another example of specified D.O.)

Hi Brian No apology necessary; its been one of those weeks and I'm probably a bit sensitive (bless me); still not long to go now and I can hear my local calling me. Have a good weekend

Bob Youel, I would normally agree with what you said in #17 but not so sure now. While looking up something else I noticed this in the introduction of L73, which seems to suggest they feel the quickest way is online. extract :- 9 If (a), (b), (c) or (d) happens, the enforcing authority must first be notified by the quickest practicable means, eg online: (a) the death of any person as a result of an accident, whether or not they are at work (see regulation 3(1)); (b) someone who is at work suffers a major injury as a result of an accident (see regulation 3(1)). Major injuries are listed in Schedule 1; (c) someone who is not at work (eg a member of the public) suffers an injury as a result of an accident and is taken from the scene to a hospital or, if the accident happens at a hospital, suffers a major injury (see regulation 3(1)); (d) one of a list of specified dangerous occurrences takes place (see regulation 3(1)). Dangerous occurrences are events, which do not necessarily result in a reportable injury, but have the potential to cause significant harm. They are listed in Schedule 2; (e) someone at work is unable to do the full range of their normal duties for more than seven days as a result of an injury (an ‘over-seven-day’ injury) caused by an accident at work (see regulation 3(2)); (f) the death of an employee if this occurs some time after a reportable injury which led to that employee’s death, but not more than one year afterwards (see regulation 4); or (g) a person at work suffers one of a number of specified diseases, provided that a doctor diagnoses the disease and (except for certain communicable diseases reportable only offshore) the person’s job involves a specified work activity (see regulation 5). The specified diseases and corresponding work activities are set out in Schedule 3. Those reportable only offshore are listed in Part II of that Schedule.

Pinks That's what I was looking up, but took it to mean that if a DO occurred and someone had a reportable injury from that same incident ( so both known at the same time) then only report the Injury. I was not sure it worked the other way around, which is the example we have. The original poster was right to report the DO, and I didn't think you could amend that report, so I would report the Injury as well separately (and add a note). In my organisations internal statistics I would consider it to one RIDDOR incident, though in the records I would note it was first reported as a DO. I would not feel I have cheated in any way doing this, there was only the one incident.

The HSE website says that ALL incidents can be reported using the online facility, but that you CAN use the contact centre for reporting fatalities and majors i.e. you don't HAVE to. Online reporting is effectively 'instant' (other than the time it takes you to type it!) and para 56 of L73 does say that online reporting is the easiest (debatable) and QUICKEST way to report! I have used the online facility for both fatalities and majors with no 'come back' from the HSE. I personally have never had any problem with the online reporting system and am entirely confident in using this as my primary and only method of reporting ALL incidents. I get a confirmation e mail and a pdf both of which I can archive. I also note 'Pinks' point about double reporting under para 53, but I am not sure if it would work the other way around i.e. while I wouldn't report the DO if I had already reported the injury (as the details of the DO would effectively be reported in the narrative) however, I would be inclined to report a subsequent > 7 day injury even if I had reported the DO. So, to the original poster. You haven't done wrong to have reported the DO and I don't think you will do wrong to report the > 7 day injury. You MIGHT be if you don't. If it is of major consequence to your internal reporting systems I don't see any problem with recording this as a single event.