Mar82017

Company fined after worker’s foot was exposed to machinery

HSE
image_pdfimage_print

A company that produces and supplies wood shavings for use as horse bedding has been fined after a worker suffered a serious foot injury at its site in Andover, Hampshire.

Basingstoke Magistrates’ Court heard that Bedmax Limited failed to protect its employee from dangerous parts of machinery. On 26 October 2015 Philip Eyers was operating the log deck, which is part of a machine that shreds trees, when his foot slipped and became lodged in a gap exposing him to the wheels of the machine which conveyed the logs. The severity of the injuries to his toes meant his big toe was cut back several times, his other four were fractured and eventually reconstructive surgery was required.

A Health and Safety Executive (HSE) investigation found that a panel that would have prevented access had been removed and not replaced where the employee was working.

Bedmax Limited, whose office is in Belford, Northumberland, pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 11(1) of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998. The court heard on 8 March 2017 that the company was fined £17,293.60 and ordered to pay costs of £623.60.

Speaking after the judge passed sentence, HSE Inspector Andrew Johnson said: “Bedmax fell below the expected standard. The necessary panel that would have prevented the incident was missing, rendering the man vulnerable as soon as he took to his task. This was a fundamental and basic health and safety failing which should have been easily avoided.”

Notes to Editors:

  1. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) is Britain’s national regulator for workplace health and safety. It aims to reduce work-related death, injury and ill health. It does so through research, information and advice, promoting training; new or revised regulations and codes of practice, and working with local authority partners by inspection, investigation and enforcement. www.hse.gov.uk[1][1 [1]]
  2. More about the legislation referred to in this case can be found at: www.legislation.gov.uk/ [2][2][2]
  3. HSE news releases are available at http://press.hse.gov.uk[3]

Mar82017

Press release: No profit for waste couple

Environment Agency
image_pdfimage_print

The operator and the landowner of an illegal waste site in an Essex village have been ordered to pay a total of £66,493

Chelmsford Magistrates’ Court heard that 14,700 tonnes of inert waste was stored on land behind a residential address known as Gean Tree in Great Horkesley north of Colchester ‘grossly’ breaching a waste exemption and planning rules.

George Nicholas James Dench pleaded guilty to running the illegal site and failing to comply with an enforcement notice to remove the waste. He was ordered to pay a total of £32,895 in fines and costs by Chelmsford Magistrates’ Court on Monday (6 Mar).

Annette Ismay Williams, who owned the land pleaded guilty to allowing the illegal waste site to run and to failing to clear the land under an enforcement notice and has to pay a total of £33,598 fines and costs.

Mrs Miriam Tordoff, prosecuting for the Environment Agency, told the court the waste had been deposited there over 2.5 years.

Williams lives at the address with her partner and their son George Dench who sought out companies to dump the waste there. He was paid £64,704.

Mrs Tordoff said only certain relatively low risk activities can be covered by an exemption which sets out conditions that must be met at all times. These include not risking human health nor the environment, not causing a nuisance with noise or odours and not adversely affecting the countryside or places of special interest.

The exemption registered by Williams allowed the use of certain types of inert waste in construction and the limit for waste soils and stones was 1,000 tonnes in any 3 years. That target was reached in the first month.

A further exemption allowed the treatment of up to 5,000 tonnes of waste in any 3 years, providing it was also used on the same site and only stored for a year.

Dench told investigating officers he had brought the soils to the site to repair the bank of a lake there. Williams said she just did the admin work. Both said they did not know how many tonnes the exemption allowed for.

Dench said he had not taken in the soils for financial gain as he was now bankrupt and he had not taken in any more since.

Mrs Tordoff told magistrates that Environment Agency officers had advised and written to the 2 saying the site needed to be cleared and operated properly.

Between September 2012 and March 2015 the Agency received 34 complaints about activities at the site.

After the hearing Environment Agency Enforcement Team Leader Lesley Robertson said:

We advised the defendants several times against accepting any more soils at the site but they continued to take it.

The site is in a village close to other homes and operations there affected people living nearby.

Councillor Simon Walsh, Essex County Council Cabinet Member for Environment and Waste, said:

This case is an example to show landowners that risk taking is not acceptable, whether it is a risk that concerns human health or the environment.

Owning a piece of land means accepting a responsibility to the surrounding area and all that resides there, be it business, homes or wildlife.

Notes for Editors:

Breakdown of costs and fines:

Dench: EA offence – fined £14,353 plus £8,103 (a share of the full costs)
ECC offence – fined £9,568 plus £750 costs

Williams: EA offence – fined £14,775 plus £8,103 (a share of the full costs)
ECC offence – fined £9,850 plus £750 costs

Mar82017

Press release: No profit for waste couple

HM Government
image_pdfimage_print

The operator and the landowner of an illegal waste site in an Essex village have been ordered to pay a total of £66,493

Chelmsford Magistrates’ Court heard that 14,700 tonnes of inert waste was stored on land behind a residential address known as Gean Tree in Great Horkesley north of Colchester ‘grossly’ breaching a waste exemption and planning rules.

George Nicholas James Dench pleaded guilty to running the illegal site and failing to comply with an enforcement notice to remove the waste. He was ordered to pay a total of £32,895 in fines and costs by Chelmsford Magistrates’ Court on Monday (6 Mar).

Annette Ismay Williams, who owned the land pleaded guilty to allowing the illegal waste site to run and to failing to clear the land under an enforcement notice and has to pay a total of £33,598 fines and costs.

Mrs Miriam Tordoff, prosecuting for the Environment Agency, told the court the waste had been deposited there over 2.5 years.

Williams lives at the address with her partner and their son George Dench who sought out companies to dump the waste there. He was paid £64,704.

Mrs Tordoff said only certain relatively low risk activities can be covered by an exemption which sets out conditions that must be met at all times. These include not risking human health nor the environment, not causing a nuisance with noise or odours and not adversely affecting the countryside or places of special interest.

The exemption registered by Williams allowed the use of certain types of inert waste in construction and the limit for waste soils and stones was 1,000 tonnes in any 3 years. That target was reached in the first month.

A further exemption allowed the treatment of up to 5,000 tonnes of waste in any 3 years, providing it was also used on the same site and only stored for a year.

Dench told investigating officers he had brought the soils to the site to repair the bank of a lake there. Williams said she just did the admin work. Both said they did not know how many tonnes the exemption allowed for.

Dench said he had not taken in the soils for financial gain as he was now bankrupt and he had not taken in any more since.

Mrs Tordoff told magistrates that Environment Agency officers had advised and written to the 2 saying the site needed to be cleared and operated properly.

Between September 2012 and March 2015 the Agency received 34 complaints about activities at the site.

After the hearing Environment Agency Enforcement Team Leader Lesley Robertson said:

We advised the defendants several times against accepting any more soils at the site but they continued to take it.

The site is in a village close to other homes and operations there affected people living nearby.

Councillor Simon Walsh, Essex County Council Cabinet Member for Environment and Waste, said:

This case is an example to show landowners that risk taking is not acceptable, whether it is a risk that concerns human health or the environment.

Owning a piece of land means accepting a responsibility to the surrounding area and all that resides there, be it business, homes or wildlife.

Notes for Editors:

Breakdown of costs and fines:

Dench: EA offence – fined £14,353 plus £8,103 (a share of the full costs) ECC offence – fined £9,568 plus £750 costs

Williams: EA offence – fined £14,775 plus £8,103 (a share of the full costs) ECC offence – fined £9,850 plus £750 costs

Mar82017

Press release: No profit for waste couple

DEFRA
image_pdfimage_print

The operator and the landowner of an illegal waste site in an Essex village have been ordered to pay a total of £66,493

Chelmsford Magistrates’ Court heard that 14,700 tonnes of inert waste was stored on land behind a residential address known as Gean Tree in Great Horkesley north of Colchester ‘grossly’ breaching a waste exemption and planning rules.

George Nicholas James Dench pleaded guilty to running the illegal site and failing to comply with an enforcement notice to remove the waste. He was ordered to pay a total of £32,895 in fines and costs by Chelmsford Magistrates’ Court on Monday (6 Mar).

Annette Ismay Williams, who owned the land pleaded guilty to allowing the illegal waste site to run and to failing to clear the land under an enforcement notice and has to pay a total of £33,598 fines and costs.

Mrs Miriam Tordoff, prosecuting for the Environment Agency, told the court the waste had been deposited there over 2.5 years.

Williams lives at the address with her partner and their son George Dench who sought out companies to dump the waste there. He was paid £64,704.

Mrs Tordoff said only certain relatively low risk activities can be covered by an exemption which sets out conditions that must be met at all times. These include not risking human health nor the environment, not causing a nuisance with noise or odours and not adversely affecting the countryside or places of special interest.

The exemption registered by Williams allowed the use of certain types of inert waste in construction and the limit for waste soils and stones was 1,000 tonnes in any 3 years. That target was reached in the first month.

A further exemption allowed the treatment of up to 5,000 tonnes of waste in any 3 years, providing it was also used on the same site and only stored for a year.

Dench told investigating officers he had brought the soils to the site to repair the bank of a lake there. Williams said she just did the admin work. Both said they did not know how many tonnes the exemption allowed for.

Dench said he had not taken in the soils for financial gain as he was now bankrupt and he had not taken in any more since.

Mrs Tordoff told magistrates that Environment Agency officers had advised and written to the 2 saying the site needed to be cleared and operated properly.

Between September 2012 and March 2015 the Agency received 34 complaints about activities at the site.

After the hearing Environment Agency Enforcement Team Leader Lesley Robertson said:

We advised the defendants several times against accepting any more soils at the site but they continued to take it.

The site is in a village close to other homes and operations there affected people living nearby.

Councillor Simon Walsh, Essex County Council Cabinet Member for Environment and Waste, said:

This case is an example to show landowners that risk taking is not acceptable, whether it is a risk that concerns human health or the environment.

Owning a piece of land means accepting a responsibility to the surrounding area and all that resides there, be it business, homes or wildlife.

Notes for Editors:

Breakdown of costs and fines:

Dench: EA offence – fined £14,353 plus £8,103 (a share of the full costs)
ECC offence – fined £9,568 plus £750 costs

Williams: EA offence – fined £14,775 plus £8,103 (a share of the full costs)
ECC offence – fined £9,850 plus £750 costs