Afternoon everyone.  I’m dealing with an accident that involves an employee tripping a broken paving slab on a public footpath.  She was on her way out of a meeting which was ‘in connection with work activity’.  Result was a fractured wrist which needed a surgery on the same day. Simple question: is this RIDDOR?

Thanks if anyone can help.

Agree with above, the cause of the accident was not work related and therefore not a RIDDOR.

To be clear. When you say public footpath, do you mean a path on company property that the members of the public use (but its owned and maintained by the company) or is it a street type footpath owned and maintained by the council.

If council I would say Not RIDDOR as it would be the same as a post person, which has been discussed before and I think everyone decided no (I struggled to make my mind up on that one). Walking down the street is part of everyday life. However, any claim would then go to the council.

If company owned property then Yes RIDDOR, for failing to maintain and so the condition of the premises played a part.

I think the Cordia case is different because there was something the employer could do, ie provide anti slip footwear as they knew she would have to visit clients in snowy / icy conditions. There is nothing a company could do about a council owned footpath.

 Agree with Roundtuit, the only way to force better guidance is to bombard the HSE with every conceivable report we can. Sadly, this would be a problem for some companies as they have to report this info to their customers. The HSE openly admit there is underreporting for RIDDOR!

Chris

The Cordia case was to do with civil liability and the tort of negligence (except it was a Scottish case but we we’ll ignore that for now). RIDDOR is a set of regulations which essentially say if you have a work related accident you must report it to the HSE. It does not matter how serious (or potentially serious it is; if it is on the list of types of incident it must be reported.

As people often mention, just because something is RIDDOR reportable it does not mean that you have to accept any form of liability.

A simple question elicits so many different responses.

Ok, so many organisations feel a RIDDOR incident is a blemish on them. That's largely because these same organisations like to boast in their contract bids how few RIDDORS they have, it spoils their 'zero tolerance' figures, or any number of other negative reasons. I have worked for household names who do their utmost to prevent a RIDDOR from being publicised. The notion that organisations will just report if in doubt is not the world I know.  

As for a potential civil claim...I'm lost for words.    

Originally Posted by: Zyggy

A simple answer to a simple question - no, not reportable under RIDDOR based on the information given. I have to agree with Ray regarding a reluctance to make reports under RIDDOR in case it has a detrimental affect on getting future work!

Unfortunately, the safety profession has built a system of performance measurement based on the absence of negatives and not the presence of positives.

Can you imagine determining the success of one’s marriage/civil partnership based on the lack of hate there is “good morning darling I don’t hate you” or how many affairs you haven’t had that year and its improvement base on how fewer extramarital excursions made year on year……………

Oh Wow!! Thanks guys. I looked in at the end of the day I posted but had no responses. Cant believe that since it has caused such a big response. I've just sat and read all the replies and intresting angles as to weather to report or not. It was a public footpath owned by the council so we would not have control of it.

I would agree that it's better to report than not. As one of you has suggested, a potential claim could ask for the F2508. Failure to produce would cause a lot more aggro. The final decision to RIDDOR is of my line manager so your help here will help us to get to that decision.

Thanks all. Have a great Easter weekend.