A lot of one sided opinion from the man who wrote the article; suggesting it is a revenue collection exercise for the Government, and that smaller firms should be targeted, as the larger ones have done so much to improve safety. How about we focus on the fact that they were fined for safety failings that resulted in someone dying.

I think it should be higher ! If you follow the guideline's a company their size and such a common issue regarding shoring up a 2.4m deep trench, it is basic stuff. Yes yes they are very sorry and all that from another article on the same link (by same person) and they will learn lessons and apply across the business bla bla bla, same old drivel. That fine didn't hurt them enough, there should be a prison sentence. Hands up all on here that doesn't know to shore up a trench ? IMHO Chris

One of only several big fines for BB has sustained over the last few years It is a pity it has taken nearly six years for justice to be given to the young man who died

I'm wondering if the HSE has been intentionally "dragging its heels" awaiting the new sentencing guideline to kick in. If yes maybe the relatives can get some comfort from that.

As an Ex HSE inspector, I can tell you the reason it takes so long is because gathering evidence correctly takes time, as does waiting for reports, arranging interviews, assessing remedial measures etc. In Scotland of course, once I'd completed my investigation it would be passed to the PF and go through their system where it had to be reviewed and legal discussions entered into. Of course, this would all be much quicker if inspectors only had one case at time, and so did the PF, but sadly staffing levels are a major contributor to delays, most of which are out of the hands of HSE. So I very much doubt that HSE would want delays - remember they have to liaise with the family, and don't 'benefit' from an increased fine themselves. Personally, I agree with the headline, but not the content of the article