• Work carried out on two properties in Northwich.
• One boiler illegal installed was found to be dangerous.
• Failures could have been catastrophic for homeowners.

An unregistered gas installer and his father have been sentenced after carrying out illegal gas work at two houses in Cheshire.

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that Scott Lodge, 37, carried out new boiler installations at two addresses in Northwich in April 2022 and December 2022 – doing so while not being registered with Gas Safe Register.

• Carrying out gas work without registration is illegal and potentially dangerous, as unqualified work can lead to gas leaks, fires, explosions, and carbon monoxide poisoning.

On one of those occasions, his father Brian, 67, who is a registered gas engineer, signed off the work and commissioned the boiler on his son’s behalf. He did this without attending the property to check the boiler for safety.

When one of the homeowners complained to the Gas Safe Register an inspection was carried out by a qualified engineer. That inspection identified defects resulting in the boiler being classed as at risk and a danger. This included a lack of support for the chimney and flue system, which carried the risk of carbon monoxide poisoning.

Members of the public are reminded that all gas work must be carried out by a Gas Safe registered engineer. The Gas Safe Register is the official list of gas businesses legally permitted to work on gas appliances. Anyone can check whether an engineer is registered by visiting www.gassaferegister.co.uk or calling 0800 408 5500.

Scott Lodge, of Adlington Drive, Northwich, pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 3(3) of the Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998. He was given a 12-month community order and complete 200 hours of unpaid work. He was also told to pay £2,500 in costs at Chester Magistrates’ Court on 22 December 2025. He must also pay £1,460 to one of the affected homeowners, which covered the cost of the work.

Brian Lodge, of Merriman Avenue, Knutsford, pleaded guilty to breaching section 3(2) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. He was given the same sentence as his son and ordered to pay the same in costs at the same hearing.

Following the hearing HSE Inspector, Ian Betley, said: “This was a deliberate breach of gas safety legislation by Scott Lodge who undertook gas work which he knew he was not registered to do.

“His failures could have led to catastrophic and tragic consequences for the homeowners. To make matters worse, Brian Lodge knowingly signed off the work as safe, despite not examining or testing it.

“All gas work must be undertaken by Gas Safe registered engineers. The public should always ask to see the gas engineer’s identification and check the registration number online to ensure it is valid. Furthermore, registered gas engineers must not circumvent the legislative requirements by signing off unregistered work as their own.”

Gas engineers and consumers can contact the Gas Safe Register in any of these ways:

• Website: Gas Safe Register
• Phone – Consumers: 0800 408 5500; Engineers: 0800 408 5577
• Email – enquiries@gassaferegister.co.uk

This prosecution was brought by HSE enforcement lawyers, Sam Crockett and Karen Park, and paralegal officer, Stephen Grabe.

Further information:

1. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) is Britain’s national regulator for workplace health and safety. We are dedicated to protecting people and places, and helping everyone lead safer and healthier lives.
2. More information about the legislation referred to in this case is available.
3. Further details on the latest HSE news releases is available.
4. HSE does not pass sentences, set guidelines or collect any fines imposed. Relevant sentencing guidelines must be followed unless the court is satisfied that it would be contrary to the interests of justice to do so.  The sentencing guidelines for health and safety offences in Scotland can be found here.
5. Guidance is available: The Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998. Relevant guidance can be found at Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998 (GSIUR) as amended. Approved Code of Practice and guidance – HSE

• A Cornish farmer has been fined for failing to take action after walkers were attacked by cattle with calves on a public footpath.
• A 75-year-old man suffered serious injuries and required surgery after being trampled while walking his dog.
• HSE found cattle with young calves, which are known to be protective and unpredictable, had been kept in a field with public access despite safer alternatives being available.

A 75-year-old man said he feared for his life after being attacked by cows while walking his dog on a public footpath in Cornwall.

The farmer responsible has been prosecuted by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) as a result.

Brian Gregory, aged 75, was on a caravanning holiday at Porthcothan in June 2024. On 30 June 2024, Mr Gregory and his labrador, Molly, were walking along the South West Coast Path at Park Head when he was suddenly attacked by a herd of cattle with calves.

He let go of Molly’s lead and the cattle chased after his dog away from him, but not in time to prevent him being trampled and butted. Mr Gregory was assisted by passing walkers and made it back to his caravan with Molly. When his partner saw his injuries, she immediately called an ambulance and he spent five days in hospital.

He suffered multiple serious injuries including a severed artery, horn marks and gashes down to the bone, and required surgery.

The farmer responsible for the cattle, Beverley Chapman of Tembleath Farm, St Columb Major, was told about the cattle attack on the same day. However, rather than removing the cattle and calves from the South West Coast Path, she added more cattle and calves to the herd to increase its size. Some of the calves were as young as 42 days old.

A month later, two local residents were walking their dogs along the South West Coast Path in the same area of Park Head when they were also attacked by the same herd of cattle and calves. They only escaped serious injury by sheltering in an area of gorse bushes by the cliff edge, but one of their dogs was seriously injured and required surgery.

Again, Beverley Chapman was informed about the incident however only removed the cattle from the South West Coast Path four days later, when instructed to do so by a Cornwall Council public rights of way officer.

The HSE investigation found that cattle with young calves, which are known to be protective and unpredictable, were being kept in a field with a public right of way across it. This can pose a significant risk to walkers, particularly those with dogs. Mrs Chapman had other enclosed fields available which did not contain public rights of way and could have been used to house the cattle and calves.

When farmers are considering putting cattle into fields with public access, they should have regard to HSE guidance AIS17 ‘Cattle and public access in England and Wales’. This guidance sets out a range of controls which should be considered and, where reasonably practicable, implemented, including:

• Where possible avoid putting cattle, especially cows with calves, in fields with public access
• Do all that is reasonably practicable to keep animals and people separated, including erecting fencing (permanent or temporary), such as electric fencing
• Assess the temperament of cattle before placing them in fields with public access
• Any animal that has shown signs of aggression must not be kept in a field where they have access to the public
• Clearly signpost all public access routes across the farm and display signage at all field entrances stating what livestock are present, such as cows with calves or bulls.

Beverley Chapman of Tembleath Farm, St Columb Major, Cornwall, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 3(2) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. She was fined £5,260 and ordered to pay prosecution costs of £4,650 and a court surcharge of £2,000 at Bristol Magistrates’ Court on 16 December 2025.

After the hearing HSE inspector, Simon Jones, said:

“Cattle are extremely protective of their calves and even calm cattle can become aggressive if they think their calves may be threatened.

“Given the nature of the cattle attack, it is fortunate that the injuries sustained by Mr Gregory weren’t fatal. On this occasion, Mr Gregory took all the right precautions while out walking.

“Despite being made aware of attacks on walkers on two separate occasions, Mrs Chapman failed to take action to remove the cattle or control risks by separating them from walkers on the South West Coast Path. It was only when officially instructed by a public rights of way officer from the local council that she took action.”

The prosecution was brought by HSE enforcement lawyer, Rebecca Schwartz and Paralegal, Gabrielle O’Sullivan.

 Further information:

1. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) is Britain’s national regulator for workplace health and safety. We are dedicated to protecting people and places and helping everyone lead safer and healthier lives.
2. More information about the legislation referred to in this case is available.
3. Further details on the latest HSE news releases is available.
4. Advice for farmers, landowners and other livestock keepers on dealing with Cattle and public access in England and Wales – HSE is available.
5. HSE does not pass sentences, set guidelines or collect any fines imposed. Relevant sentencing guidelines must be followed unless the court is satisfied that it would be contrary to the interests of justice to do so. The sentencing guidelines for health and safety offences can be found here.

Isolation failures are one of the main causes of hydrocarbon releases on offshore installations on the UK Continental Shelf. These are not minor incidents – many have the potential to cause serious injury, fatalities or major accidents if ignited.

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) continues to find serious failings during inspections and investigations, which has led to significant enforcement action in recent years.

Now the regulator is highlighting the findings from its inspections and investigations to assist operators in improving their safety performance on offshore installations.

Scott Templeton, Principal Specialist Inspector in HSE’s Energy Division – Offshore, said:

“The problem is not the procedures on paper, it is that people are not following them. Most UK operators have isolation procedures that broadly follow HSG 253 (the guidance on safe isolation of plant and equipment).

“Effective and lasting improvement requires everyone involved in isolations, from senior management to those carrying out work on the plant, to share a genuine commitment to achieving and maintaining isolation procedures and practice to the required standard.

“We will soon issue updated inspection guidance, so operators know what to expect they will be assessed on. Safe isolation will remain an inspection priority.”

Findings from inspections and investigations

HSE inspections have identified critical gaps in offshore isolation practices:

• Company standards failing to meet HSG 253 requirements – some duty holder ‘selection tools’ specify lower isolation standards than HSG 253 requires.
• Poor hazard identification – risk assessments frequently miss trapped fluids, pressure sources and non-return valves. Electronic systems encourage ‘copy and paste’ approaches which can fail to reflect actual task hazards.
• Inadequate isolation planning – dutyholders are proceeding with complex isolations (multiple passing valves, extended boundaries) rather than waiting for shutdowns, resulting in risks that are not as low as reasonably practicable (ALARP).
• Inaccurate piping and instrumentation diagrams (P&IDs) – plant drawings do not reflect actual conditions, leading to incorrect isolation design and implementation issues.
• Missing or inadequate method statements – step-by-step instructions for applying, testing and removing isolations are either absent, insufficiently detailed or unclear, increasing the risk of human error.

All variations from isolation standards must be risk-assessed and approved by a technically competent, operationally independent person (typically onshore). Control measures identified in risk assessments must be followed.

Questions for your organisation

Procedures

• Do your isolation procedures align with HSG 253?
• Do they give clear guidance on venting and depressurising safely?
• Do they require detailed method statements?

Risk management

• When do you allow single block and bleed isolations on hazardous fluids, and how do you ensure risks are ALARP?
• Have you defined an acceptable leakage rate for isolation valve integrity?
• How do you handle situations where valve integrity is hard to prove, such as flare headers?
• What are your ‘cleanliness criteria’ before breaking containment?

People

• How do you minimise human error?
• Is training and competency assessment suitable for everyone involved in isolations?
• How effective are you at recognising high-risk activities when multiple jobs are happening simultaneously?

Assurance

• Is your monitoring and audit system robust enough to catch procedural violations?
• How do you manage deviations from isolation procedures?
• Do you have a system to consider plant modifications that would reduce isolation risks?
• Do you identify problem valves and fix them?

The solution

Isolation risks exist at every stage – from planning through to completion. Good procedures alone are not enough. Everyone from senior management to those doing the work must genuinely commit to following procedures every time.

HSE is engaging with industry to share learning and improve standards. Updated guidance will be issued soon.

These failures are entirely preventable. The question is whether your organisation will prevent them.

Further information

HSE hosted a webinar on process isolations in the offshore oil and gas sector. Essential viewing for all those involved in isolation activities for offshore installations in the UKCS, from design and installation, through to approval and audit.

This is available to watch via Health & Safety matters website. Register here to watch: Offshore UKCS Process Isolations – Regulatory Expectations and Learnings

HSG 253 ‘The safe isolation of plant and equipment’ provides comprehensive guidance on isolation procedures.

• Worker critically injured after wall collapsed into excavation.
• Temporary works were not designed, planned or managed.
• HSE guidance on temporary works is available.

A construction company has been fined £100,000 after a steel-fixer was seriously injured when a newly built blockwork wall collapsed at a site in Poole.

Matrod Frampton Limited pleaded guilty at Bristol Magistrates’ Court on Friday 5 December 2025 after the incident left 69-year-old Patrick Grant with life-changing injuries.

The court heard how the breeze block wall had been back-filled too early, before the mortar had properly set. The wall collapsed while Mr Grant was working nearby, crushing him against the concrete floor of the excavation.

The incident happened on 19 August 2022 at the company’s site on Old Coast Guard’s Road, Poole. Mr Grant and two colleagues had started work at the lower level of the excavation when the wall at the north end gave way at around 8.30am.

Emergency services attended the scene, but there was no emergency rescue plan in place. The use of an unstable ladder to access the deep excavation delayed rescue efforts, and Mr Grant had to be hoisted out by the fire and rescue service before being airlifted to hospital.

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that Matrod Frampton Limited had failed to properly assess a foreseeable risk associated with temporary works on site.

The investigation identified that there was no temporary works design for the blockwork wall, nor for any other temporary work structures at the site. The company had failed to appoint either a temporary works coordinator or a temporary works supervisor, despite this being highlighted as a serious concern in a safety report issued eight days before the incident.

Temporary works on construction sites include trenches, excavations, temporary slopes and stockpiles, formwork, falsework, propping, shoring, edge protection, scaffolding, site fencing and signage.

Without a temporary works procedure in place, groundworkers backfilled the wall prematurely, leading directly to its collapse.

Matrod Frampton Limited, of Riverside Park, Wimborne, Dorset, pleaded guilty to breaching Regulations 13(1) and 19(1) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015. The company was fined £100,000 and ordered to pay £8,242 in costs and a £2,000 victim surcharge at Bristol Magistrates’ Court on 5 December 2025.

After the hearing HSE inspector, Alexander Ashen, said: “The correct design and execution of temporary works is an essential element of risk prevention in construction.

“This incident illustrates what can happen when temporary works are not properly organised. Matrod Frampton Limited is an established construction company, and a temporary works procedure should have been implemented as a matter of course.

“The fact that the company’s own health and safety consultants raised this issue eight days before the incident makes this wholly avoidable event all the more tragic.

“HSE will not hesitate to take action against companies that fail to properly plan and manage serious risks on construction sites.”

Guidance on temporary works is available on the HSE website.

This HSE prosecution was brought by HSE enforcement lawyers, Iain Jordan and Rowena Goodwin, and paralegal Officer, Hannah Snelling.

Further information:

1. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) is Britain’s national regulator for workplace health and safety. We are dedicated to protecting people and places and helping everyone lead safer and healthier lives.
2. More information about the legislation referred to in this case is available.
3. Further details on the latest HSE news releases is available.
4. Guidance on temporary works can be found here: https://www.hse.gov.uk/construction/safetytopics/temporary-works.htm
5. HSE does not pass sentences, set guidelines or collect any fines imposed. Relevant sentencing guidelines must be followed unless the court is satisfied that it would be contrary to the interests of justice to do so. The sentencing guidelines for health and safety offences can be found here.

• Company fined for serious health and safety failures at a Manchester construction site
• The company repeatedly failed to improve standards or fulfil principal contractor duties.
• Free guidance on managing health and safety in construction is available

A Cheshire property developer has been fined £45,000 after the Health and Safety Executive found multiple failures at a construction site in Manchester.

Numerous health and safety failings were found during a site inspection at a home build project being undertaken by Stockport Development Limited on Kingsley Road, Manchester, in November 2023. The inspection by Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found missing edge protection on first floor landings, missing and damaged security fencing, a lack of fire alarms and extinguishers, heavily obstructed walkways, and inadequate welfare provision for workers.

This resulted in four Improvement Notices being served, requiring the company to take action to comply with the law and protect its workers and members of the public.

When it was established that there had been four previous visits to the company’s construction sites between February 2021 and March 2023, all of which resulting in enforcement action being taken in relation to poor health and safety standards, an investigation was launched by HSE.

The investigation established that the company had repeatedly failed to fulfil its principal contractor duties and had failed to take heed of previous warnings and advice given by HSE inspectors.

Images from Stockport Development Limited site 

Principal contractors have a responsibility to plan, manage and monitor construction work to ensure that it is carried out without risks to health or safety. Further guidance on Managing health and safety in construction – HSE can be found on HSE’s website.

Stockport Development Limited, of Bird Hall Lane, Stockport, Cheshire, pleaded guilty to a breach of regulation 13(1) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015. The company was ordered to pay a fine of £45,000 plus surcharge of £18,000 and costs of £6,297 at Manchester Magistrates court on Friday 12^th December.

HSE Inspector, Claire Whitehurst, said: “This company showed a total disregard for keeping its workers and members of the public safe by failing to meet the most basic health and safety standards.

“Principal contractors have a responsibility to ensure they identify and manage risks involved in construction work, and to put safe systems in place to protect all who may be affected by their undertaking.

“Companies should be aware that HSE will not hesitate to take appropriate enforcement action, including prosecution, against those that fall below the required standards, even where no incident has occurred.”

The HSE prosecution was brought by HSE enforcement lawyer Gemma Zakrzewski and supported by HSE paralegal officer Benjamin Stobbart.

Further Information

1. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) is Britain’s national regulator for workplace health and safety. We are dedicated to protecting people and places and helping everyone lead safer and healthier lives.
2. More information about the legislation referred to in this case is available.
3. Further details on the latest HSE news releases is available.
4. Relevant guidance can be found here: Managing health and safety in construction – HSE
5. HSE does not pass sentences, set guidelines or collect any fines imposed. Relevant sentencing guidelines must be followed unless the court is satisfied that it would be contrary to the interests of justice to do so. The sentencing guidelines for health and safety offences can be found here.

• Worker had one leg amputated below the knee and sustained significant injuries to the other
• Major injury rate for sawmilling is over two and a half times that of general manufacturing
• Free guidance is available, developed in collaboration with HSE and the sawmill industry.

A large wood manufacturer in Shropshire has been fined £160,000 after an employee sustained life-changing injuries when working at their Ellesmere premises.

Robert Stubbs, 37, sustained life-changing injuries when clearing a jammed log on a machine in May 2021. Mr Stubbs climbed onto a stationary conveyor bed and used a metal pole to move a log. The conveyor started to move unexpectedly, dragging his legs across the moving chains and trapping them against a stop plate. Subsequently Mr Stubbs had his right leg amputated below the knee and sustained significant injuries to his left leg.

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that E.T.C. Sawmills Limited failed to adequately assess the risks and devise and implement effective measures to prevent access to the dangerous moving parts of the Quad Saw machine or to stop the movement of the dangerous parts before people entered the danger zones. Additionally, the company failed to provide employees with safe systems of work or suitable and sufficient information, instruction, training and supervision to enable safe operation of the machine.

Although standards of health and safety are much improved over recent years, sawmilling remains a high-risk industry with a major injury rate that is over two and a half times that of general manufacturing.

Machinery accidents remain one of the major causes of injury, with lock-out procedures for interrupting mechanised production processes still being a problem area. There is also an average of one fatality every year. HSE sawmill guidance is available to read at Health and safety in sawmilling – HSE.

E.T.C. Sawmills Limited, 281 Penarth Road, Cardiff, CF11 8YF, pleaded guilty to breaching section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 and was fined £160,000 and ordered to pay costs of £7,395.51 at Kidderminster magistrates court on Tuesday 9 December.

HSE Inspector Keeley Eves said: “E.T.C Sawmills is one of the largest manufacturers of softwoods for the fencing and pallet industries in England.

“The life-changing injuries sustained by Mr Stubbs could easily have been prevented if the company had acted to identify and manage the risks involved, put a safe system of work in place and ensured that employees were appropriately trained and supervised.”

This HSE prosecution was brought by HSE senior enforcement lawyer, Nathan Cook and paralegal, Sarah Thomas.

Further Information: 

1. The Health and Safety Executive(HSE) is Britain’s national regulator for workplace health and safety. We are dedicated to protecting people and places and helping everyone lead safer and healthier lives.
2. More information about the legislation referred to in this case is available.
3. Further details on the latest HSE news releases is available.
4. Relevant guidance can be found here: Health and safety in sawmilling – HSE
5. HSE does not pass sentences, set guidelines or collect any fines imposed. Relevant sentencing guidelines must be followed unless the court is satisfied that it would be contrary to the interests of justice to do so.  The sentencing guidelines for health and safety offences can be found here.

• Two decades after one of Europe’s largest industrial incidents, the legacy of Buncefield continues to shape safety standards across the UK’s major hazards sector

This week marks 20 years since the Buncefield explosion in Hertfordshire – one of the largest industrial incidents in Europe and the UK’s largest peacetime explosion.

The incident

In the early hours of 11 December 2005, a storage tank at the Buncefield oil storage depot overfilled, releasing a massive petrol vapour cloud that spread beyond the site perimeter and ignited. The resulting explosions and fires caused widespread damage and disruption, forcing thousands of residents and businesses to evacuate.

Remarkably, no lives were lost. However, the impact on people, property and the environment was profound. More than 2,000 homes and 600 businesses were affected, with damage extending several kilometres beyond the site. The incident left a lasting mark on the local community and fundamentally changed the UK’s approach to managing major hazard risks.

Investigation and accountability

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) and the Environment Agency (EA) jointly led one of the most extensive industrial investigations in UK history. The work involved detailed forensic analysis, engineering assessments and consultation with industry experts to determine how the incident occurred and what could be learned.

The investigation identified systematic failings in tank level monitoring, overfill prevention and safety management systems. Weak oversight and inadequate controls allowed large quantities of petrol to overflow undetected, leading to the release of a vapour cloud that ignited with catastrophic force.

Following the investigation, the operating companies and site owners were successfully prosecuted under the Health and Safety at Work Act. The courts imposed multi-million-pound fines, setting a precedent for accountability in major hazard industries. The case outcomes reinforced the responsibility of operators to maintain robust systems for preventing and mitigating major accidents and the importance of Process Safety Leadership.

Learning and reform

In the aftermath of the incident, several major reviews and task groups were established to drive improvements:

• The Buncefield Standards Task Group (BSTG) – a joint regulator-industry initiative – developed stronger standards for fuel storage and transfer operations
• The Major Incident Investigation Board (MIIB) published a series of influential reports identifying root causes and recommending wide-ranging reforms to safety leadership, management systems and emergency planning
• The Process Safety Leadership Group (PSLG) was created to oversee implementation, producing its 2009 final report which set out new benchmarks for overfill prevention, automatic shutdown, secondary containment and process safety management.

Onshore major hazard industries have recently relaunched the Process Safety Leadership Principles Guidance taking the important opportunity this anniversary offers to promote good practice.

These reports provided a foundation for industry-wide reform, promoting stronger leadership, real-time monitoring, improved reliability of electrical and control systems, and closer collaboration between regulators and operators.

Sarah Albon, Chief Executive of the Health and Safety Executive, said:

“Twenty years on from Buncefield, we remember not only the scale of the incident but also the determination shown by everyone involved to learn from what happened and drive lasting change.

“The comprehensive investigations, reforms to safety standards, and strengthened collaboration between regulators and industry have created a legacy that continues to protect people and places today. Buncefield demonstrated that when we face serious challenges head-on with transparency and commitment to improvement, we can fundamentally change how major hazards are managed.

“As HSE, we remain committed to applying these lessons, working closely with industry and our regulatory partners to ensure the highest standards of safety and environmental protection across all major hazard sites in Great Britain.”

Legacy and ongoing impact

Two decades on, Buncefield remains a defining moment in UK major hazards safety regulation. The incident exposed critical weaknesses in risk management and highlighted the importance of learning, transparency and continuous improvement in the robust oversight of major hazard sites.

Since then, HSE and the EA have worked with industry and international partners to strengthen safety standards, enhance risk management and ensure consistent enforcement where failings occur.

The lessons of Buncefield continue to shape not only how onshore major hazard industry operates, but how HSE itself develops as a regulator. Investing in people, building capability and fostering a culture of learning remain central to HSE’s mission.

Ken Rivers, Board Member for Health and Safety Executive said:

“Buncefield has led to profound changes not just in the operational, technical and regulatory aspects of managing major hazards but also in leadership, and the way industry and regulator work together in the UK.

“It led industry to becoming more self-disciplined, taking ownership, and it led to a more mature and collaborative relationship with the regulator.

“The impact of Buncefield remains with us today continuing to stimulate industry and regulator to work together to protect people and places.”

The Buncefield anniversary is an important reminder that vigilance, leadership, continuous learning and robust regulation are essential to protecting people, communities and the environment.

Notes to editors:

• The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) is Britain’s national regulator for workplace health and safety. We are dedicated to protecting people and places, and helping everyone lead safer and healthier lives.
• Buncefield section on our website: Buncefield – HSE
• Process Safety Leadership Group (PSLG) guidance: Buncefield Response Programme

• Worker suffered life-altering back injuries after falling from a MEWP basket.
• HSE found the company failed to plan, supervise or safely carry out work at height.
• AP Tree Specialists Ltd fined £20,000; director fined £1,000.

An arboriculture company based in Derby has been fined £20,000 after an employee suffered life-altering back injuries when he fell over 30 feet from a MEWP basket.

An employee of AP Tree Specialists Ltd had been carrying out tree surgery from the basket of a mobile elevating work platform (MEWP) at a mobile site in Derby on 25 January 2024. When the machine stopped working while elevated, there was no one on site who could bring the basket safely to the ground. The employee attempted to abseil from the basket, resulting in a fall to the ground.

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive found that AP Tree Specialists Ltd failed to plan, appropriately supervise and carry out work at height in a safe manner. The company had not completed a suitable and sufficient risk assessment for work at height activities, and employees were not appropriately trained in the use of lifting equipment.

The director, Matthew Scholes, was acting as site supervisor at the time and was directly involved in decisions and actions that led to the injuries sustained by the employee.

The Work at Height Regulations require employers to ensure that work at height is properly planned, appropriately supervised, and carried out safely. Where lifting equipment is used, HSE guidance states that operatives must receive appropriate training, and that rescue planning, equipment and personnel must be considered as part of site assessment. Further guidance is freely available in HSE’s Safe Use of Lifting Equipment (LOLER) Approved Code of Practice.

AP Tree Specialists Ltd pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. The company was fined £20,000 and ordered to pay £6,956 in costs at Birmingham Magistrates’ Court on 3 December 2025.

Director Matthew Scholes pleaded guilty to breaching Section 37(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. He was fined £1,000 and ordered to pay £400 in costs.

HSE investigating inspector, Kerry Scott, said: “This incident could have been avoided if AP Tree Specialists Ltd had planned the work at height with suitable and sufficient risk assessments and safe systems of work, including a rescue plan. They should have provided the employee with the correct information, instruction and training for working at height and for using the lifting equipment. HSE will not fail to take action where companies and directors do not ensure the health and safety of their employees.”

This HSE prosecution was brought by HSE enforcement lawyer Arfaq Nabi and supported by paralegal officer Thomas Smith.

Notes to Editors:

1. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) is Britain’s national regulator for workplace health and safety. We are dedicated to protecting people and places, and helping everyone lead safer and healthier lives.
2. More information about the legislation referred to in this case is available.
3. Further details on the latest HSE news releases is available.
4. Relevant guidance can be found here Safe use of work equipment. Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998. Approved Code of Practice and guidance L22.
5. HSE does not pass sentences, set guidelines or collect any fines imposed. Relevant sentencing guidelines must be followed unless the court is satisfied that it would be contrary to the interests of justice to do so.  The sentencing guidelines for health and safety offences can be found here.

• 18-year-old was still learning how to operate machinery when incident occurred
• Harry now has to live with permanent scarring and a loss of feeling on the side of his chest.
• HSE guidance on preventing access to dangerous parts of machinery is available.

A manufacturing company in Newbury has been fined £187,600 after the shirt of an apprentice got caught in machinery.

Harry Pullen, who was 18 years old at the time, was pulled into a radial-arm drill resulting in three broken ribs and needing skin grafts.

He had been working as a machinist for Power and Energy International, manufacturing industrial valves and filters, for less than a year when the incident occurred on 10 July 2023.

The apprentice was still learning how to operate the different machines involved in manufacturing. He was left with a large piece of skin removed from his chest, hospitalised for five days and unable to work for six months.

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that Power and Energy International had failed to take appropriate measures to ensure the safety of their employees. The company’s radial-arm drills did not have adequate guarding. Machine operators, including Harry, had not been properly trained on using the safety features. The company was also found to have made modifications to the radial-arm drill which increased the risk of operators getting caught and pulled into the machine.

HSE guidance states employers must properly assess risks and take effective measures to prevent access to dangerous parts of machinery. This is normally achieved with fixed or adjustable guards but where this is not practicable other protective devices may be needed that stop the movement of dangerous parts. Employers must also ensure that they provide their employees with the necessary level of information, instruction, training, and supervision to enable them to work safety with the equipment they use. Guidance on health and safety in engineering workshops can be found on the HSE website: Health and safety in engineering workshops – HSE

Power and Energy International Ltd of Stanley Street, Salford, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. The company was fined £187,600 and was ordered to pay £7,464 in costs at a hearing at High Wycombe Magistrates Court on 8 December 2025.

After the hearing HSE inspector, Peter Crees, said: “The fine imposed on Power and Energy International underlines the importance of having effective controls to protect workers who operate radial-arm drills and other potentially dangerous machines.

“Harry’s injuries and the suffering it caused both him, and his family, could have easily been avoided.”

Harry now has to live with permanent scarring and a loss of feeling on the side of his chest. He said: “I would not go back on a radial arm drill… it’s not something I ever want to do again.”

This HSE prosecution was brought by HSE enforcement lawyer Iain Jordan and paralegal officer Melissa Wardle.

Further information:

1. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) is Britain’s national regulator for workplace health and safety. We are dedicated to protecting people and places and helping everyone lead safer and healthier lives.
2. More about the legislation referred to in this case is available.
3. Further details on the latest HSE news releases is available.
4. Guidance on the use of work equipment is available.
5. HSE does not pass sentences, set guidelines or collect any fines imposed. Relevant sentencing guidelines must be followed unless the court is satisfied that it would be contrary to the interests of justice to do so.  The sentencing guidelines for health and safety offences can be found here.

Every winter, as temperatures drop, some of Britain’s most vulnerable citizens seek shelter wherever they can find it. For rough sleepers, a large commercial waste bin might seem like temporary refuge from the cold. But this desperate act of survival can quickly become a death trap.

In May 2024, Vitalij Maceljuch, 36, climbed into a cardboard recycling bin behind a kitchen store in Chester seeking shelter. Hours later, the bin was collected and tipped into a waste lorry. Despite the driver following proper checking procedures (looking into the bin, calling out, and shaking it on the lorry’s forks), Mr Maceljuch was not discovered until his body was found on a conveyor belt at a recycling depot in Flintshire. The coroner concluded he died from severe head and neck injuries, likely caused by being crushed.

This tragedy serves as a stark reminder that this is not a theoretical risk. It is a real and present danger that demands continued vigilance from businesses and waste collection services alike.

This video from the Environmental Services Association gives waste operatives an overview of how to check if someone may be sleeping inside or around a waste container and what to do if you do find someone:

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has published comprehensive guidance on preventing people getting into large waste and recycling bins, developed in partnership with the Waste Industry Safety and Health (WISH) Forum. This guidance sets out simple, practical measures that can save lives.

Tim Small, HM Principal Inspector of Health and Safety for Waste and Recycling, said: “No one should die because they sought shelter from the cold. Businesses and waste collectors have a clear responsibility to implement simple checks that can prevent these entirely avoidable tragedies.”

The solution lies in two fundamental approaches: preventing access to bins in the first place and checking bins before they are emptied. Neither of these measures requires significant investment or complex procedures. What they require is vigilance, particularly during the colder months when rough sleepers are most likely to seek shelter.

Businesses managing bin storage areas should review their waste-storage arrangements. These are the risk factors that increase the likelihood of tragedy:

• Bin areas that are isolated, dark, and easily accessible
• Bin lids that are unsecured and easy to open
• Storage containing dry materials like cardboard and textiles that might attract those seeking comfortable shelter
• Areas stored for long periods, unemptied and undisturbed

The Waste Industry Safety and Health Forum’s guidance makes clear that waste producers and businesses managing bin storage areas have the primary responsibility for ensuring people do not get into bins. Where practicable, this means locating bins in secure areas, ensuring proper lighting, and training staff to watch for and report signs of people attempting to access bins.

Where there are signs of people getting or trying to get into bins, businesses should use appropriate bin types to minimise risks. Those with lid locks, lid-opening restrictors, fixed or lockable grilles, or other access-restrictors. These security devices must be properly maintained and used at all times. During periods of cold or wet weather, these checks become even more critical.

Employees who discover someone in a bin need to understand how people in such vulnerable circumstances are likely to behave and how to manage the situation and their own safety. There is potential for aggression or violence, and workers should not attempt to restrain anyone, especially if they try to flee. The priority is helping people get out safely and reporting the incident appropriately (including under RIDDOR regulations if there are fatalities or serious injuries requiring hospital treatment).

As we approach the coldest time of the year, every business that manages commercial waste bins should review their procedures. Recording incidents where people are found in or near bins (even when no injury occurs) and sharing this information between waste producers and collectors can help all parties assess whether their control measures are adequate and identify where improvements are needed.

These are simple measures. They cost little. But they could save a life.

Notes to editors:

• The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) is Britain’s national regulator for workplace health and safety. We are dedicated to protecting people and places, and helping everyone lead safer and healthier lives.
• Full guidance: Preventing people getting into large waste and recycling bins on HSE.gov.uk
• Industry guidance: Waste Industry Safety and Health Forum (WISH) guidance on managing access to large waste and recycling bins (scroll down to ref no WASTE25).
• Watch: Situational Awareness: People in Bins (an industry awareness video for waste operatives)
• Posters and information cards: Awareness post.pdf, Situational awareness – huddle card – fit for work.