Hi,
I work for a very large Commercial & Residential Property owner and I'm in discussions with senior management over H&S responsibilities when they outsource building management. The line of "can't delegate responsibility for H&S" is not working and I'm being pressed for tangible evidence that the owner always has overall responsibility for building H&S e.g. lifts, boilers, cooling towers etc. and when he outsources property management to a third party, he should be auditing these third parties to ensure that they are managing these things competently.
comments/suggestions please

Brigham, plenty of case law, prosecutions and enforcement action out there. Also, HSE website has some very good advice for landlords and property owners.

Maybe undertake a presentation incorporating cases and outcomes. Also look at training senior management, hopefully getting their buy-in.

Feel free to PM me if you need any help/advice.

I'm not an expert on this area, but I can't see how the responses so far have answered the question.

In the Octel case, it was very much their site that they operated. They brought in the contractor, issued the permit etc. Surely it was the fact that they were the operator that counted the most, not that they owned the site (if in fact they did)?

A quick search of the HSE website came up with this document regarding gas appliances for "domestic and certain commercial premises" http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg285.pdf.

On page 2 it clearly states that a Landlord cannot delegate duties to a tenant, except for a "non-residential part of a premises." If a management agent is used the landlord retains overall responsibility for ensuring compliance with requirements but the contract "should clearly identify who is to make arrangements for maintenance and safety checks." I didn't find any reference to the property owner in the document.

I would suggest that the answer is that responsibility is shared. But I am not convinced ownership is the main factor. For example, the bank own most of my house but I don't think they have must responsibility for my H&S. If the building management company are acting as Landlord, it appears to me that they have the responsibility.

May alos look up the Tullis Russel papermill prosecution.

Contractors hired in to carry out roof/gutter cleaning. They deviated from the Method Statement that they had declared to TR. HOWEVER, TR failed to carry out many of the "actions" set out in their procedure, including daily site inspections.
They were fined (I think) c£250k following fall through roof that resulted in death of one of contractors employees.

Phil

hi , I am trying to work out would this apply, senior guys will help me out here .

"Some of the Directors in my company responsible for the properties mentioned do not believe they have to ensure that the third party asset managers are actually performing these legal duties"

so regulation 11 management regs ;

a)co-operate with the other employers concerned so far as is necessary to enable them to comply with the requirements and prohibitions imposed upon them by or under the relevant statutory provisions and by Part II of the Fire Precautions (Workplace) Regulations 1997;

(b)(taking into account the nature of his activities) take all reasonable steps to co-ordinate the measures he takes to comply with the requirements and prohibitions imposed upon him by or under the relevant statutory provisions and by Part II of the Fire Precautions (Workplace) Regulations 1997 with the measures the other employers concerned are taking to comply with the requirements and prohibitions imposed upon them by that legislation; and

(c)take all reasonable steps to inform the other employers concerned of the risks to their employees' health and safety arising out of or in connection with the conduct by him of his undertaking.


joe

Brigham, if you're stone-walled from a H&S perspective, perhaps it's time to play another card.
Your Managers are presumably interested in ££ & value for money, and not prone to pay invoices unless they are reasonably satisfied that what has been invoiced has actually been done to the requisite standard? "Standards" from a contract perspective encompass quality, price and statutory compliance.

Any Organisation can spend time and resources checking that those they appoint are doing what they're supposed to, the smarter ones will take care over the appointment process and ensure that the contract provision ensures that the contractor delivers these assurances to you (via regular reports, independent audit etc.)instead of you chasing him.

http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/priced/hsg159.pdf might also give you some useful pointers

The director still holds a duty of care and there is a clear requirement to provide health and safety information to contractors about premises you own and as other have posted ensure contractor competence. This is both from a civil and criminal law perspective. I don’t see how an organisation could be reasonably satisfied of a contractor’s health and safety competence without doing some checks. However, I would think about how to expanding the discussion to encompass the business impact of an incompetent contractor burning down a building or creating a different danger that leads to national headlines. Maybe a few facts about losses caused by contractors would help. In a previous role we did some research about fires in heritage premises and found 8 of the most recent 10 major fires we researched were caused by contractors. Managing contractor performance is good business not just a potential legal liability as Marks and Spencer found out recently.

Thanks Stedman, which case was that?