This doesn't arise from a work activity so I wouldn't consider it a RIDDOR.

That is the criterion, not whether equipment that is at other times used for work is involved.

The question about whether personal use of work vehicles should be allowed is a separate one, and doesn't affect the point that this was indeed personal use and not work use.

"Help" the boss - on overtime?

Works vehicles insurance is typically with or without "personal use"

Our company waggons are insured WITHOUT personal use meaning at the end of work they are parked up in the depot until the following morning.

Company cars are insured WITH personal use (typically the person issued the vehicle) meaning they can be.

If your vehicle insurance precludes personal use drivers should not be using them outside of work hours (including commuting).

I do think you're quite right to investigate it, and to consider the insurance status.

Hi David

I think that the investigation should seek to find out how often this happens (if anyone is prepared to be open about the issue).

If it were to be identified that it is not very rare for the bosses to get help in moving stuff in company vans, then I think that a Court might construe this as unpaid employment - though as may often be the case in such circumstances, each case would need to be considered on its merits.

To some extent the judgment would be likely to fall on consideration of how "voluntary" helping out the boss with an ostensibly personal matter might be.

Just because someone does not get paid doesn't meant that they are not "at work" as defined in the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 which would be the starting test point.

I would not report this as a RIDDOR case - not work related.

I would not even investigate this, based on the details provided this should be investigated by management  / HR - not H&S.

It is unclear on the size of the company and whether the manager concerned is the owner.

But using company property (van) & fule without permission / tax / insurance may well breach non H&S law anc oculd be condidered as theft / fraudulant acts - neither is relevant to the H&S aspects.

If you consider that this a H&S issue, would you expect to see a risk assessment, insurance cover, training in place and if these are required & not in place - disciplinary measure may be deemed appropriate.

Hi Evans

I entirely agree that management should take the lead in any investigation.

For the simple reason that whether any possible irregularity is a "health and safety", "HR" and/or any other issue, whatever the issue(s) might be should be an integral part of the line management function.

In terms of e.g. the primary legislation for occupational health and safety in the UK, the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 and supporting guidance dating back to e.g. HSG65, this is implicit. Management should OWN health and safety and not leave it to the H&S person.

However, I think that it would be entirely sensible to include the H&S bod in any investigation to help identify anything about the way things were done that offers room for improvement in work-related health and safety standards.

P

As the shift had ended, this cannot be classed as work releated, it's a favour.

If he had been asked to assist during working hours then that can easily be deemed work related.

My experience of the HSE RIDDOR team is poor, they only seemed to relate word for word guidance from their RIDDOR section of the website, and are unable to make any decision on an incident and if it is or isn't reportable.